On Wed 25/Oct/2023 15:19:36 +0200 Matt V wrote:
What if we were to look at re-writing this in a way that says something like
this:
In the case of optional DMARC flags (ex: sp, adkim, aspf, pct) that are
malformed, the processing system SHOULD ignore them as invalid inputs, and
MUST
utilize the valid flags that are mandatory (ex: v, p) and properly
formatted.
Where an RUA tag exists and the mandatory flags are invalid the processor
SHOULD default to p=none as the policy and indicate the change in the RUA
report.
Example:
"V=DMARC1; p=reject; sp=quarter; rua=mailto:[email protected]
The DMARC processor would evaluate that sp= is a bad value and ignore it
completely, defaulting to just the valid p= record, and treat it accordingly
under the DMARC process.
We could possibly suggest a notation for RUA reports as <policy>none
(assumed)</policy> or use the existing override reporting options to indicate
that this was the 'assumed/best guess' operation due to bad record formatting.
+1. The example should be part of the text, obviously (although the above
indentation doesn't suggest so).
Best
Ale
--
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
