On February 25, 2023 5:57:54 AM UTC, John Levine <[email protected]> wrote:
>It appears that Seth Blank <[email protected]> said:
>>-=-=-=-=-=-
>>
>>This feels too complicated, and like it adds back in complexity that jumps
>>between labels, which was the exact confusion (jumping instead of walking)
>>that the tree walk aimed to fixed.
>
>It also adds all the problems you get with CNAMEs, like long chains
>and loops. If you have enough control over your DMARC records to add a
>"refer" thing, why couldn't you just copy the policy you want to use?
>
>While I agree that the results for ret.bmcc.cuny.edu will be
>different, I see precious little reason to think that anyone would
>care. If people can find examples where it's more plausible that the
>difference would matter, please send them along.
Agreed. Adding sp=none to the bmcc.cuny.edu would achieve the same result
without adding complexity to the protocol. Let's not (add the complexity).
Scott K
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
