On Mon 03/Oct/2022 18:01:06 +0200 Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
On Mon, Oct 3, 2022 at 10:26 AM Brotman, Alex <[email protected]> wrote:
So we would likely need a section in the core document with a SHOULD for
evaluation (if it’s not already there), and then a section in the aggregate
reporting for a MUST for reporting on evaluated information (if they choose
to send reports at all), correct?
[...]
From the actual protocol standpoint, the filtering part of DMARC operates
just fine if you make the shortcut Doug is proposing, so the first SHOULD
is probably apt but the MUST is moot because it doesn't change
interoperability.
Let me add that reporting /all/ identifiers can be unfeasible. (I, for
example, collect identifiers to be reported using SQL left join of various
copies of the table, which delivers results as just that many columns, although
more might have been evaluated at reception time.)
Reporting just the "most important" identifiers could be an option.
Best
Ale
--
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
