On Wed, 2023-03-01 at 22:02 -0500, John Levine via mailop wrote: > In retrospect the service tag was a mistake. It's not widely > implemented, so if you use anything other than s=email you will lose > mail because recipient systems will get confused. The MTAs that > receive mta-sts messages generally have no idea there is supposed > to be something special about those messags.
I am still not really sure what to make of it; Based on (the three) TLS-RPT i have seen so far, 'not using s=tlsrpt' is actually the lived practice. With the state of the RFC, i am not even sure whether s=tlsrpt would be valid to set in the first place. With the state of things missing s=tlsrpt should still give a passing score (with note, though, listing this whole situation). What i am not overly sure about is whether it might not make sense to set a 'could improve' if i ever encounter the unicorn of an entity sending TLS-RPT _and_ having that record set. Any suggestions? With best regards, Tobias _______________________________________________ mailop mailing list [email protected] https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
