We should probably add a "v=counter" to the DMARC syntax. But the
odds are good that will screwed up too in duplicate records.
I think my software will read the first encounter of a DMARC text
record and not seek for an "override" that could follow. Not going to
waste time to verify it.
We
In article <20171219183616.ga6...@marwnad.com> you write:
>Section 6.6.3, Policy Discovery.
>
>"If the remaining set contains multiple records or no records,
>policy discovery terminates and DMARC processing is not applied
>to this message."
Oh, look at that. Thanks.
>> For that matter, what if
>> Dunno if this ever came up before. What, if anything, does this mean?
>>
>> _dmarc.example.com IN TXT "v=DMARC1; p=none"
>> _dmarc.example.com IN TXT "v=DMARC1; p=reject"
>
>https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7489#section-6.1 say
>.. MUST concatenate these strings ...
Nope, that's talking about s
On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 11:34:25 -0500, jo...@taugh.com wrote:
>
> Dunno if this ever came up before. What, if anything, does this mean?
>
> _dmarc.example.com IN TXT "v=DMARC1; p=none"
> _dmarc.example.com IN TXT "v=DMARC1; p=reject"
>
> Looking through RFC 7489 I don't see anywhere that it says
Am 19.12.2017 um 17:34 schrieb John Levine:
> Dunno if this ever came up before. What, if anything, does this mean?
>
> _dmarc.example.com IN TXT "v=DMARC1; p=none"
> _dmarc.example.com IN TXT "v=DMARC1; p=reject"
Hello John,
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7489#section-6.1 say
.. MUST concate
Dunno if this ever came up before. What, if anything, does this mean?
_dmarc.example.com IN TXT "v=DMARC1; p=none"
_dmarc.example.com IN TXT "v=DMARC1; p=reject"
Looking through RFC 7489 I don't see anywhere that it says that more
than one record is forbidden.
For that matter, what if anything
