>> On 17 Aug 2020, at 16:47, Dotzero <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>>> 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)
Talking about precise language, Dave, I think you owe Michael an apology ;-)
/rolf
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
