On Fri, 5 Aug 2022, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
On Fri 05/Aug/2022 04:44:21 +0200 John Levine wrote:
DMARC uses available information to produce a result of "Authenticated" >>>> or
"Not Authenticated". Sometimes, the message can be reliably categorized
as "Authenticated" or "Not Authenticated" without reference to the
specifics of a domain owner policy. ...
But DMARC has never said whether messages are "Authenticated". It says >>
whether they
are aligned, based on the authentication results from DKIM and SPF. That's not
the
same thing, and the distinction is deliberate. It's quite possible for a
message to
be authenticated by DKIM or SPF, but not aligned.
The difference w.r.t SPF is that DMARC records have default values. The only
mandatory element of a record is dmarc-version. This makes the "implicit"
DMARC record quite obvious.
While DMARC effectively has a default of p=none and no reports, I don't
see how that is relevant. DMARC is about alignment, not authentication.
However, it might be worth to note that, among non-DMARC software, there are
verifiers which issue a warning when the authenticated identifier is not
aligned. Call it dmarcese?
Once again, I see no benefit in describing things that are not DMARC.
R's,
John
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
