On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 10:37 AM Dave Crocker <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 8/17/2020 7:33 AM, Dotzero wrote: > > DMARC fixes one thing and one thing only, direct domain abuse. > > > It does no such thing. Domains can still be 'directly' abused in all > sorts of ways that DMARC does not affect. > Mea Culpa. You are correct that it only does so in the context of SPF and DKIM validation which protects rfc5322 From field domains and aligned rfc5321 Mail From domains (SPF). > <rant> > > A continuing and in my view fundamental problem with discussion in this > space is the lack of careful and precise language when talking about > actions and effects. > > </rant> > > So... > > DMARC fixes abuse of rfc5322.From field domains. > > THAT is the only thing it does. > See above. I was even more specific than you were in terms of what DMARC does. > And it does it at the expense of breaking some legitimate uses. > Only when it is used in domains where there are individual user accounts and not (only) transactional mail uses. If I use a hammer (no pun intended) to pound in a screw, it doesn't make it the right tool for the job. Michael Hammer (Inaccurately referred to by you as Herr Hammer)
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
