On Mon, Apr 1, 2024 at 12:17 PM Tim Wicinski <tjw.i...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have to agree with Seth's comments that "security teams believe an SPF > hard fail is more secure". > I've been on the receiving end of that discussion more than once. > > Also, can we reference those two M3AAWG documents ? That seems like > operational guidance. > > I'm digesting the threads for the purpose of preparing tickets to track the work, and I suspect one of the tickets will include, "Add reference to the following two M3AAWG documents": 1. https://www.m3aawg.org/sites/default/files/m3aawg_managing-spf_records-2017-08.pdf 2. https://www.m3aawg.org/sites/default/files/m3aawg-email-authentication-recommended-best-practices-09-2020.pdf -- Todd Herr | Technical Director, Standards & Ecosystem Email: todd.h...@valimail.com Phone: 703-220-4153 This email and all data transmitted with it contains confidential and/or proprietary information intended solely for the use of individual(s) authorized to receive it. If you are not an intended and authorized recipient you are hereby notified of any use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the information included in this transmission is prohibited and may be unlawful. Please immediately notify the sender by replying to this email and then delete it from your system.
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
