While not directly DMARC, AR fields can serve as an input for DMARC processing,
so I think it's generally worth getting right.
I was checking a recent SPF change relevant to one of my serves, so I found
myself looking at this:
Authentication-Results: mx.google.com;
spf=pass (google.com: domain of [email protected] designates
2607:f0d0:3001:aa::2 as permitted sender) [email protected];
dkim=pass [email protected];
dmarc=pass (p=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kitterman.com
The major gripe I have with this is that the correct ptype for SPF reports is
mailfrom, not mail. See
http://www.iana.org/assignments/email-auth/email-auth.xhtml
Also, the local part should be removed as was done for DKIM.
If there's someone from Google on the list, I'd appreciate it if you could
have a look at this or pass it on to someone who can. If the ptype is wrong,
it's going to make the field harder to consume reliably.
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)
