On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 7:54 AM Alessandro Vesely <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed 07/Aug/2019 17:16:29 +0200 Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: > > > >> If the definition of ptype smtp were "a parameter of the SMTP session > used > >> to relay the message" it would be perfect. I'd propose that > policy.iprev > >> be deprecated and smtp.remote-ip used instead>> > > > > Given that RFC8601 was published just last month, it'll probably be a > while > > before this happens. > > Wouldn't an accepted erratum be enough to change the wording in the IANA > page? > That's not what the RFC Editor erratum system is for. The document reflects what the WG intended to publish at the time, so this isn't an erratum, it's a new change to the specification. About the new ptype, a reviewer suggested to also use it to report whether > the > query supported DNSSEC. No DNSWL that I know supports it. However, I know > some DKIM filters report that feature either as a comment or as a reason > in the > dkim= methodspec. Using the new ptype might make that clearer. Consider: > > Authentication-Results: example.com; > dkim=pass dns.sec=yes [email protected] header.b=j5aQ3SJv > Are there any MTAs that would take a different action based on this information? -MSK
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
