From the document: <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-dmarc-dmarcbis-00.html:>
> 4.1. Authentication Mechanisms > The following mechanisms for determining Authenticated Identifiers > are supported in this version of DMARC: […] > [RFC3986], which can authenticate both the domain found in an > [RFC5322] HELO/EHLO command (the HELO identity) and the domain found > in an SMTP MAIL command (the MAIL FROM identity). DMARC uses the > result of SPF authentication of the MAIL FROM identity. Section 2.4 > of [RFC7208] describes MAIL FROM processing for cases in which the > MAIL command has a null path. RFC-3986 is titled “Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax.” I suspect a reference to RFC-7208 was intended here. RFC-5322 is the standard for the Internet Message Format, which doesn't have a HELO/EHLO. I suspect a reference to RFC-5321 was intended here. So, maybe this section should read: “[RFC7208], which can authenticate both the domain found in an [RFC5321] HELO/EHLO command (the RFC5321.HELO identity) and the domain found in an SMTP MAIL command (the RFC5321.MailFrom identity). DMARC uses the result of SPF authentication of the MAIL FROM identity. Section 2.4 of [RFC7208] defines the MAIL FROM identity for cases in which the MAIL command has a null path.”
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
