On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 4:55 AM, Alessandro Vesely <[email protected]> wrote:
> It would be silly to deny that ARC is about indirect mail flows. The > reason it > is perceived to be in the wrong camp is that DMARC focuses on originators > of > email, while ARC requires no changes for them. A possible tweak is to > introduce an ARC-0, zero for originator, an optional ARC set with i=0: > Perhaps I'm misunderstanding, but doesn't an i=0 ARC set represent a verification by the originator of its own mail? > ARC-0 is substantially equivalent to a weak signature. The ARC-Seal field > proves that the originator was involved. ARC-Message-Signature is > expected to > be broken by forwarders. ARC-Authentication-Results may contain just an > auth > stanza, with a possibly redacted authenticated identity. > Doesn't the i=1 ARC set also prove the originator was involved? -MSK
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
