Scott Kitterman wrote: >> Am 13.05.2016 um 22:35 schrieb Terry Zink via dmarc-discuss: >>> In Office 365 it would. Others' implementations may vary. >> >> "may or may not" - is that really the intention of DMARC? > > I think RFC 7489, paragraph 3.1.2 is very explicit about this. It is > supposed to pass and if it doesn't it's a bug.
It would appear to me that it is that paragraph which acknowledges, explicitly, that this is not so. It says: Note that the RFC5321.HELO identity is not typically used in the context of DMARC (except when required to "fake" an otherwise null reverse-path), even though a "pure SPF" implementation according to [SPF] would check that identifier. - Roland _______________________________________________ dmarc-discuss mailing list dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org 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)
