On Sun, Dec 6, 2020 at 11:13 PM Murray S. Kucherawy <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 2:17 PM John R Levine <[email protected]> wrote: > >> We would like to close this ticket by Dec 15, two weeks from now, so >> short >> trenchant comments are welcome. >> >> Ticket #1 is about SPF alignment. We need to replace references to 4408 >> with 7408, ando clarify what if anything we do with SPF HELO checks if >> the MAIL FROM is null. One possibility is to say only MAIL FROM SPF >> counts, if you want to align your bounces, sign them. The other is to >> explicitly say that HELO alignment is OK on bounces. >> > > I have a slight preference for the first option. HELO is too arbitrary in > the protocol for me to put much value in using it in any of these systems. > There's a bit of an implementation detail though. If one is relying on an encapsulated ck_host() function then you may not know whether it checked the HELO or the MAIL FROM. Imposing a requirement like this from DMARC seems like it verges on a layering violation. --Kurt
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
