On 07/17/2013 12:15 AM, Douglas Otis wrote:
>From a specification standpoint, it seems odd to invalidate email from otherwise uninvolved domains that are technically RFC compliant. Wouldn't such specifications make the DMARC specification RFC ignorant? RFC5322 is a draft standard and RFC6854 is standards track. Requiring rejection of otherwise valid messages is hostile to those following standards.
This viewpoint is incorrect and reflects an error in understanding that senders frequently make.
An SMTP server (or the host that it runs on) is the property of a receiver. When a sender offers a message for delivery, the sender is asking the receiver to extend a delivery privilege, a privilege that the receiver is free to decline for any reason or for no reason. This commercial/organisational relationship is the context in which SMTP operates, not the other way around. The SMTP specification can never compel a receiver to accept a message. If the specification appears to have this effect (I don't believe that RFC 5321 has this effect, but perhaps I have missed an interpretation that you are relying upon), then one might realistically describe the specification as reality-ignorant.
Any time an RFC and reality diverge, it it the RFC that is reality-ignorant, not reality that is RFC-ignorant.
If it happens that the DMARC specification reflects reality better than existing RFCs - even standards track ones - then once again, it is those RFCs that are in error, not the DMARC specification.
- 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)
