On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 8:56 AM Michael Thomas <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On 12/30/20 5:48 AM, Todd Herr wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 4:42 AM Alessandro Vesely <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Tue 29/Dec/2020 22:02:20 +0100 Michael Thomas wrote: >> > On 12/29/20 12:47 PM, Todd Herr wrote: >> >>> Unless those values in parens are a MUST requirement, the dmarc=fail >> is >> >>> highly misleading. >> >> >> I agree with Michael here. When a (trusted) dmarc=fail is seen >> downstream, its consumers neither know what policy was specified nor >> whether it was honored. >> > > That depends on your definition of "downstream", I guess. > > MDAs and local clients (web and mobile) at the mailbox provider will have > the information they need. > > No they don't. I keep saying this, but you guys keep dismissing me. > Painting up "fail" for p=none is absolutely the wrong thing to do. It is > not what the user expects to see for a piece of mail that is perfectly > acceptable to the originating domain. This is an error or omission, full > stop. > > > I'm sorry, but I don't know that I've seen an example of painting up "fail" for p=none in my Gmail or Google Apps clients; it is possible you can share a screencap of an example of what you're referring to here, please? -- *Todd Herr* | Sr. Technical Program Manager *e:* [email protected] *p:* 703.220.4153 This email and all data transmitted with it contains confidential and/or proprietary information intended solely for the use of individual(s) authorized to receive it. If you are not an intended and authorized recipient you are hereby notified of any use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the information included in this transmission is prohibited and may be unlawful. Please immediately notify the sender by replying to this email and then delete it from your system.
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
