On Sun 25/Jul/2021 19:28:12 +0200 Douglas Foster wrote:
Ale said:
"ARC is not a part of DMARC, despite the acronym being a substring."
Is this really true? Some time ago, the chairs said that ARC was the candidate
solution to the mailing list problem, and that DMARCbis would not fly without a
mailing list solution.
The mailing list solution that seems to be emerging is From: munging. There
are other possibilities, see Section 4.1.3.3 of rfc7960. A MLM needs to adopt
a solution that works for all subscribers, not only for the ones whose
receivers implement DKIM or some other solution-specific protocol.
There are several ways to munge From: in order to minimize end-user
inconveniences. Among these, there are cooperative methods that allow
receivers to unmunge From: on delivery. The MLM munges From:, which works for
all, but some of the receivers restore the original From: value based on
additional authentication techniques. ARC is one such technique. MLM
transformation reversion is another one.
Are such additional authentication techniques, that help repairing DMARC
damage, themselves part of DMARC? In a proper sense they're not, in some other
sense however they have to be. For example, for questions concerning DMARC
reports:
* It has been established that ARC data is part of aggregate reports, but it's
not clear what data is to be included in which reports.
* In what cases should results of MLM transformation reversion be included in
the aggregate reports destined to the original author domain?
Best
Ale
--
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
