I was asking a question: where does the text say that PSD=y forces strict alignment?
On Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 10:24 AM Scott Kitterman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On July 25, 2022 1:27:07 PM UTC, Alessandro Vesely <[email protected]> wrote: > >On Mon 25/Jul/2022 12:56:02 +0200 Douglas Foster wrote: > >> We had a discussion about domains that need to set both PSD=Y and > PSD=N. It highlighted one of the problems with using a tag which implies > mutual exclusivity when exclusivity does not apply. > >> > >> The stated solution was that when PSD=Y is found on the same-domain > policy, then PSD=N is also assumed, which implies that strict alignment is > also applied. This seemed like a reasonable solution. > >> > >> However, I cannot find any reference to this principle in the > specification. What happened? > > > > > >To impose strict alignment to PSDs which send mail was hypothesized in > March. Afterwards, the algorithm was changed by disregarding psd=y at step > 2; that is, on the domain input to the algorithm. Therefore, a sending (or > signing) PSD operates as part of its org domain. > > > >In an example I posted, I showed that mail.psd.org.example cannot work to > authenticate From: [email protected]. However, a sibling like > signing.org.example would be in relaxed alignment. > > > >I still think an example like this is clarifying, albeit unreal. > > > I agree. I do think unreal examples are generally counter productive. > > I believe we were pretty much agreed on if a PSD sends mail for itself it > has to use strict alignment. I think what we have specified is appropriate. > > Scott K > > _______________________________________________ > dmarc mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc >
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
