In article <[email protected]> you write: >Section 6.6.3, Policy Discovery. > >"If the remaining set contains multiple records or no records, >policy discovery terminates and DMARC processing is not applied >to this message."
Oh, look at that. Thanks. >> For that matter, what if anything does this mean? >> >> _dmarc.example.com IN TXT "v=DMARC1; p=none; p=reject" > >> In 7489 it says "DMARC records follow the extensible "tag-value" >> syntax for DNS-based key records defined in DKIM [DKIM]." I hope that >> means they follow the DKIM rule that duplicate tags make the whole >> record invalid, but that could be clearer. > >The definition of tag-value syntax in [DKIM] section 3.2 says "Tags >with duplicate names MUST NOT occur within a single tag-list; if a tag >name does occur more than once, the entire tag-list is invalid." This >language could be repeated in the DMARC specification, but I don't see >any real reason to do so. > >There's also a formal ABNF definition in 7489 section 6.4 which shows >that duplicate tags aren't allowed. I see that, but unfortunately the DMARC ABNF doesn't match the prose. Section 6.3 says that unknown tags are ignored, but the ABNF syntax doesn't allow them. R's, John _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
