On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 1:54 PM Laura Atkins <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Dec 20, 2017, at 11:55 AM, John R Levine <[email protected]> wrote: > > SPF doesn't have sub-domain level protection like DMARC does, would it be > useful to look at adding it? > > Obviously the word "protection" is wrong, I meant coverage. > I doubt it. SPF was written and implemented a decade ago and it's > unlikely anything new would be widely deployed. > > And there are way bigger issues with SPF that everyone is avoiding. Bring > up one leetle bit and all of a sudden we’re looking at a full rewrite of > the spec. > > That is just not going to happen. > I sometimes think there needs to be a secret history repository to help newcomers with the unknown politics and disagreements going on, or maybe I need to make it to more conferences to ask these things in person. Obviously there's nothing preventing a receiver from doing it, in fact I think our bestguess code does do a fallback to primary domain already, but what's requested is more widespread adoption. And we probably don't fall back to the TLD. Brandon
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
