If you are referring to section 3.2.4. then I'm pretty sure that's referring to 
gateways in the protocol sense (see RFC 5598, section 5.4.) which convert 
internet mail into a different messaging protocol, such as SMS/MMS or 
(historically) UUCP. The interoperability concerns are still valid though there 
is much less of this in wild than there was 10 years ago and (for sending) you 
can normally put a compliant MTA in front of them.

Ken.

From: dmarc <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Douglas E. Foster
Sent: Tuesday 15 September 2020 11:59
To: [email protected]
Subject: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC and Gateways?

I was surprised to see email technology gateways included in RFC 7960.

I would expect that a public gateway would use a from address within the 
gateway domain name, so that it can accept replies.   A gateway dedicated to a 
single organization would release messages into that organization on a trusted 
path, and anything forwarded out of that organization would be signed at the 
outbound mail gateway.

Can anyone who was involved with RFC 7960 comment on whether the gateway 
problem still exists?

DF

_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc

Reply via email to