On Mon, Jul 24, 2023 at 9:13 AM OLIVIER HUREAU < olivier.hur...@univ-grenoble-alpes.fr> wrote:
> > Correct, the ABNF doesn't allow this construction, so it's a syntax > error. > > DMARCbis ABNF is not as restrictive as RFC 7489 : > > > dmarc-record = dmarc-version *(dmarc-sep dmarc-tag) [dmarc-sep] *WSP > > > > If you want more than just the ABNF to defend that position, have a > look at the DKIM RFC, from which this syntax was cloned; it says: > > Then wouldn't it make sense to add this specification to DMARC-bis? > Can't hurt. -MSK
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
