On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 11:27 AM Seth Blank <seth= [email protected]> wrote:
> https://trac.ietf.org/trac/dmarc/ticket/49 > > The penultimate paragraph of > https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7489#section-6.3 states: > > the "v" and "p" tags MUST be present and MUST > appear in that order. > > While the v= tag pretty universally appears first, the p= tag does not in > many records, and no implementation appears to care. > > The v= tag must appear first, or the policy discovery mechanism as defined > in https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7489#section-6.6.3 would break. > > But there doesn't appear to be any real reason to keep the normative > requirement that the p= tag MUST be second in the record after the v= tag, > nor does this requirement seem to have any impact on interoperability or > general record parsing in theory or in practice. > > Should we remove this normative requirement? > It's been a while since the original discussion, but I can't remember why the requirement is there in the first place. The only benefit I can think of is that having "v=" first lets you decide very quickly if you care to continue, but the savings is really pretty small. -MSK, devoid of hat
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
