On Thu, Apr 13, 2023 at 9:11 AM Dotzero <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 1:57 PM Murray S. Kucherawy <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 8:27 AM Brotman, Alex <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> In the case of DNSSEC, my ISP is the intermediary utilizing DNSSEC, and >>> the website signs records via DNSSEC. The website I want to go to breaks >>> their DNSSEC. My ISP cannot retrieve a record to return to my browser that >>> can be used. A is the browser, B is the website, C is the ISP DNS platform. >>> >>> >>> >>> I understand your point, though I think mine still has reasonable >>> merit. I understand the charter is to resolve the interoperability between >>> indirect mail and p=reject. I’m just not sure I see an intersection of >>> “fix indirect email” and “p=reject”. >>> >> >> I see what you're getting at, but I don't think they're comparable. >> There are a few main differences: >> >> 1) DMARC is a surprise to some actors. The intermediary in DMARC doesn't >> know that it's suddenly contributing to a problem. In the DNSSEC example, >> the ISP DNS platform knows it's participating; it is, after all, a >> DNSSEC-aware resolver. In DMARC, suddenly MLMs around the world have to >> change what they're doing and don't know they're part of a new problem. >> > > If DMARC is a surprise to "some actors" today, they clearly haven't been > paying attention. It was first publicly published (not through IETF) in > 2011. With regard to MLMs and forwarders, the wake up call would/should > have been in 2014 when AOL, !Yahoo and other domains with lots of users > started publishing p=reject policies. I'm not commenting on other aspects > of the discussion, only your belief that in this day and age, DMARC is a > surprise to anyone. >
The context in which I said that is important. I didn't claim people are surprised by the existence of DMARC in a "keep up with the world" sort of sense. In comparison to DNSSEC, however, the intermediary (the DNS platform) does not one day find itself surprised by the world having changed around it; it was part of the change. In DMARC, the intermediary (the MLM) suddenly finds the world broken around it, and other actors in the scenario are pointing their fingers at the intermediary saying it's the thing that's broken. That's a huge difference. -MSK, participating
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
