ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: WG Review: Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting & Conformance (dmarc)

2014-07-14 21:12:21
On Tuesday, July 15, 2014 00:15:49 Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 04:47:19PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
   However, DMARC is problematic for mail that does not flow from
   operators having a relationship with the domain owner, directly to
   receivers operating the destination mailbox. Examples of such
   "indirect" flows are mailing lists, publish-to-friend
   functionality,
   mailbox forwarding (".forward"), and third-party services that send
   on behalf of clients. The working group will explore possible
   updates
   and extensions to the specifications in order to address
   limitations
   and/or add capabilities. It will also provide technical
   implementation guidance and review possible enhancements elsewhere
   in
   the mail handling sequence that could improve could DMARC
   compatibility.

This is a solved problem, the "Rfc822.Sender" field should have
from the outset trumped the "Rfc822.From" field when determining
message origin, and the DMARC policy should be that of the "Sender"
domain.  Some MUAs already expose "Sender != From" by displaying
"From <sender> on behalf of <author>".  This needs to become standard
MUA behaviour.

I am coming around to the point of view.

FWIW, the text is from the proposed charter, I didn't write any of it.

Scott K

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>