>
>
> Barry, this is obviously a new relaxation option.  From a mail system
> integration standpoint, the options are:
>
> 1) A version bump to DMARC2 with new semantics with backward DMARC1
> compatibility, or
>
> 2) Use a DMARC1 Extended tag option allowed by DMARC1.   Alessandro cited
> an excellent backward compatible extended tag option:
>
> auth=dkim|spf (default value), auth=dkim+spf, auth=dkim, auth=spf
>
>
>

FWIW, I support the concept above, which would be compatible with DMARC
today. Would anyone from a large receiver like to comment?

Regards,
Ken
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc

Reply via email to