It appears that Michael Thomas <[email protected]> said: >Didn't Tero say that there used to be a MUST somewhere that made >explicit that both SPF and DKIM MUST be evaluated? If so, why was it >taken out and why can't it be put back in to clear his issue? There is a >like absolutely no rationale for receivers to not verify DKIM these >days. Even 20 years ago it wasn't an issue.
I think the current language is clear enough. If you disagree, please send text. As should be evident when reading the draft, this part has been reorganized so even if you wanted to put back some sentence from 7489, there's no place for it to go. R's, John _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
