On 06/11/2012 23:43, Mason Schmitt wrote:

It would seem that leveraging something like DMARC to handle this case would enable senders to dictate the policy that receivers should implement concerning the senders domain only,

This is a pretty common misunderstanding: Domain Owners do not _*dictate*_ anything to Mail Receivers.

To further re-purpose a frequently re-purposed phrase: Domain Owners propose, Mail Receivers dispose.

as opposed to a blanket policy across all domains.

This is a worthwhile distinction, but is still a local issue for a Mail Receiver, not the subject of an interoperability specification.

That said, the substitution of RFC5321.MailFrom for an absent RFC5322.From is a sufficiently common practice that there may be sense in calling this out in the Security Considerations (that a Mail Receiver which does this should also apply the DMARC algorithm as though the synthesised RFC5322.From header was actually present).

- Roland


--
  Roland Turner | Director, Labs
  TrustSphere Pte Ltd | 3 Phillip Street #13-03, Singapore 048693
  Mobile: +65 96700022 | Skype: roland.turner
  [email protected] | http://www.trustsphere.com/

_______________________________________________
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)

Reply via email to