On Sun 15/Dec/2024 03:11:47 +0100 Daniel K. wrote:
The prose references RFC 8601, 2.7.2 as authoritative for result values
for spf:
For the "spf" element, the "result" element MUST contain
a lower-case string where the value is one of the results
defined in [RFC8601] Section 2.7.2
but the XSD references RFC 7208
I was tempted to just update it, but 8601 allows "policy" as a valid
value, so I ask:
Should I just add it, like below?
(neutral is reordered to be in the same order as in the table in RFC 8601.)
It has to be allowed, since possible alternatives seem to be worse (non
reporting it, reporting as pass, reporting as permerror, ...). Perhaps the
prose should say to report any policy.whatever in the human_result field.
Should we get rid of the TempError and PermError comments at the same
time, or are they relevant?
Yes, please remove them.
Or, maybe it was a deliberate choice once upon a time, not to include
"policy" as valid, and we should change the reference in the prose instead?
Best
Ale
--- a/dmarc-xml-0.2.xsd
+++ b/dmarc-xml-0.2.xsd
@@ -243,14 +243,15 @@
</xs:restriction>
</xs:simpleType>
-<!-- SPF verification result, see RFC 7208 Section 2.6. -->
+<!-- SPF verification result, see RFC 8601 Section 2.7.2. -->
<xs:simpleType name="SPFResultType">
<xs:restriction base="xs:string">
<xs:enumeration value="none"/>
- <xs:enumeration value="neutral"/>
<xs:enumeration value="pass"/>
<xs:enumeration value="fail"/>
<xs:enumeration value="softfail"/>
+ <xs:enumeration value="policy"/>
+ <xs:enumeration value="neutral"/>
<!-- "TempError" commonly implemented as "unknown". -->
<xs:enumeration value="temperror"/>
<!-- "PermError" commonly implemented as "error". -->
Daniel K.
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
