On Mon 13/May/2024 12:53:14 +0200 Scott Kitterman wrote:
On May 13, 2024 7:59:20 AM UTC, Alessandro Vesely <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi,
someone objected to PSDs being unable to receive failure reports even if the
PSD is the From: domain. For example:
_dmarc.psd.example IN TXT "p=none psd=y [email protected]
In case a mail having "From: [email protected]" fails DMARC, couldn't the
receiver generate a failure report?
draft-ietf-dmarc-failure-reporting-10 currently says:
Report generators MUST NOT consider ruf= tags in records having
a "psd=y" tag, unless there are specific agreements between the
interested parties.
instead, it could say:
Report generators MUST NOT consider ruf= tags in records having
a "psd=y" tag, unless the domain is the RFC5322.From domain and/
or there are specific agreements between the interested parties.
However, draft-ietf-dmarc-dmarcbis#section-10.2 says:
DMARC records for multi-organizational PSDs MUST NOT include
the ruf= tag.
Opinions?
I think that 10.2 should stay as is.
I don't know how common it will be that PSDs send mail.
It's the second time I hear this topic being discussed. Not very common, but
may happen.
I think your proposed change is fine as far as the reasons the current
restrictions are there. It does, however, make things a little more
complicated. Is this important enough to add implementation complexity for all
implementers?
The current text as well as the proposed change require the PSO to pass the
reporting address to the receiver. If there is a specific agreement, we may
suppose the address is contained therein. The other case requires to put it in
the ruf= tag.
Could Section 10.2 say SHOULD NOT instead?
Best
Ale
--
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
