RFC 7960 is a whole treatise on the mailing list (etc) issue. Are you looking for more than that baked into the protocol spec?
Barry On Wed, Feb 5, 2025 at 4:40 PM Paul Wouters via Datatracker < [email protected]> wrote: > Paul Wouters has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-dmarc-dmarcbis-38: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > Please refer to > https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ > for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dmarc-dmarcbis/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > I wish the document had an Operational Considerations Section that > explained > the pitfalls of DMARC, eg the issues with mailing lists or alias expanders > (eg > like we suffer from at IETF itself). It could perhaps recommend something > (eg > support for From rewriting as commonly done). It feels just declaring the > pain > points "out of scope" is a bit of a weak solution. > > * Signing DNS records with Domain Name System Security Extensions > (DNSSEC) [RFC4033], which enables recipients to validate the > integrity of DNS data and detect and discard forged responses. > > Please use RFC9364 or BCP237 as the proper reference to DNSSEC. > > > >
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
