If I understand your suggestion, then I think you lose some flexibility
that way. Suppose you want to use relaxed alignment. Say you have some
subdomains that you want to use p=reject for, but at the organizational
level, you want p=none.
_dmarc.sub.org.tld TXT "v=DMARC1;p=reject;aspf=r"
_dmarc.org.tld TXT "v=DMARC1;p=none;aspf=r"
You get a message with RFC5322.From domain sub.org.tld, and
RFC5321.MailFrom domain other.tld.
So the first record you find, at _dmarc.sub.org.tld doesn't give you enough
information to judge alignment. Do you keep walking? I suppose you could
jump to the longest common domain (tld in this case) and start walking
again there.
It's not that you lose flexibility, it's that it's different. A tree walk
lets you put different policies at labels between the org domain and the
leaf, while the current PSL approach doesn't. The question is whether it's
different in a way that's better or worse or indifferent. Given the
numbers that show how flat the DNS tree is, my guess is that it's
indifferent.
Regards,
John Levine, [email protected], Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
