On March 24, 2022 12:01:39 PM UTC, Alessandro Vesely <[email protected]> wrote:
>On Wed 23/Mar/2022 12:08:16 +0100 Douglas Foster wrote:
>> But we do have a difference between PSOs, which never send mail, and private 
>> registrars, which may or may not send mail from the domain or subdomain used 
>> as 
>> a private registration point.  It seems desirable to resolve this ambiguity 
>> so 
>> that we can reliably know that a true PSO cannot be impersonated, while 
>> allowing private registrars to document their configuration.
>> 
>> A "sendsmail=(y,n)" indicator would accomplish this purpose.
>
>
>For documentation purposes, although I'd have preferred meaningful, explicit 
>tokens, if people much more experienced than me insist that obscurity is 
>advisable in this case, I don't agree but I accept it.
>
>For security, a private registrar should set psd=y.  If it sets psd=n, it 
>forces all registrants below that point to do the same.  If the From: domain 
>has psd=y, you know that they send mail because you received it.  In that 
>case, 
>it can only authenticate by strict alignment.
>
>Perhaps, we could advise private registrars that they had better use an 
>intermediate label with psd=y as a registration point if they want more DMARC 
>flexibility at their base domain.

Based on the current draft, this is not correct.  An exact match is the org 
domain, even if PSD=y, so even if the policy uses the relaxed alignment 
approach, it will still be aligned.

Scott K

_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc

Reply via email to