On 7/6/12 5:27 PM, "Scott Kitterman" <[email protected]> wrote:
>On Saturday, July 07, 2012 12:21:03 AM Franck Martin wrote: >> On 7/6/12 4:46 PM, "Scott Kitterman" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >On Friday, July 06, 2012 11:28:17 PM Franck Martin wrote: >> >> May be I can clarify >> >> >> >> SPF tests have to pass first on their own merit, so we are not >>changing >> >> anything. It still applies to the Mail From envelope. What DMARC >>adds is >> >> alignment between the domains in the mail from: and From: combined >>with >> >> the DKIM pass and alignment we get if DMARC pass or not. >> >> >> >> So DMARC do use SPF. >> > >> >If you want to put it that way, then that makes it even clearer that >> >DMARC is >> >not a replacement for SPF policy. Call it what you want, just don't >> >force >> >people into choosing between the feedback mechanism in DMARC (which I >> >really >> >like) and existing policy mechanisms that might say something stronger. >> >> I understand SPF is doing rounds in IETF, you could suggest there a >> feedback mechanism to the protocolŠ > >There is one of those defined in RFC 5598, but it's new and doesn't have >much >in the way of deployment (there's a similar mechanism defined for DKIM). > >> We don't force anyone to adopt DMARC, we are even saying it is not for >> everyone, but point taken to may be alert more if people have a current >> spf -all or adsp and want to move to dmarc. It could be clearer that >> p=none in that cases may change disposition. > >I think that's an unbelievably poor design choice, but now that you've >clarified it, I've removed my DMARC record. But also the purpose to this list is to learn from a broader audience, and take that in consideration for the next spec review. I understand for a receiver which does not have DMARC in its tool box applying a SPF -all to avoid to receive fake email from a domain is a solution, but they seem to go to great length to check the the sender SPF record is correct, and personally, I would prefer they do DMARC, but I'm also pragmatic, something is sometimes better than nothing. Finally, as you had reports, did you notice a difference in the way your emails were handled (I may have missed that in the thread). _______________________________________________ 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)
