On Friday, July 06, 2012 02:21:58 PM Murray Kucherawy wrote: > On 7/6/12 7:09 AM, "Scott Kitterman" <[email protected]> wrote: > >I confess I hadn't noticed this in the spec before. I don't think it > >makes > >any sense. If you don't want mail rejected due to SPF fail or an ADSP > >discardable result, why would you ever publish DNS records that might > >suggest > >that? > > > >I think it's out of scope for DMARC to try and impose these kinds of > >requirements. Personally, I publish (and have for years) SPF -all > >records and > >don't have any problems with them. I published a DMARC record to get > >the > >associated feedback information. That by no means was meant to indicate > >that > >I wanted receivers to deal with SPF differently on it's own. > > > >This is particularly relevant to SPF because virtually all the 'bad' > >feedback > >I'm getting in my DMARC reports is about email lists. In the case of > >email > >lists, my SPF record doesn't even enter into it because mailing lists use > >their own. > > > >Receivers that don't want mail rejected due to ADSP or SPF should deal > >with > >that in the appropriate DNS records. I think it would be appropriate for > >the > >spec to point that out, but not to try and impose such limits on > >recievers. > > There's also the case where the Domain Owner publishes a ~all policy but a > DMARC p=reject. I think we're pretty sure we want DMARC's policy > assertion to prevail in this case, as it's a more comprehensive check.
That's a different case (and I agree). I don't think SPF or ADSP/DKIM results should cause receivers to treat DMARC results any particular way. Generically, I expect that receivers will look at a basket of policy results (including non-authentication related ones like RBL checks) and if any of them say to reject/spamfolder/etc the message they'll do the harshest one (absent whitelist results). Scott K _______________________________________________ dmarc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://www.dmarc.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc-discuss NOTE: Participating in this list means you agree to the DMARC Note Well terms (http://www.dmarc.org/note_well.html)
