It appears that Scott Kitterman <[email protected]> said: >I agree there's no chance a PSD like .com would be authorized to publish a >DMARC record, but a big part of why is the privacy implications of allowing >it. I think we should document the concerns. ccTLDs will need to develop >their own policies and we should give them the relevant information to support >that.
That's reasonable. >DMARC record or not. For a mail receiver I think it's reasonable to assume >any PSD (psd=y in their record) should be treated conservatively and only send >reports for non-existent domains. That's OK with me although it's not what the draft says now. I can do a pull request. I hope we agree that a non-existent domain is one for which a DNS query returns NXDOMAIN, as the current dmarcbis draft says, and not anything else. Fun fact: we don't define "policy domain" anywhere although it's blindingly obvious what it means. R's, John _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
