Use a null mx instead. https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7505
On Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 8:43 AM Al Iverson via dmarc-discuss < dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org> wrote: > Might be better to have an MX record that points to localhost, because > if you have an A record but no MX, people will just try to connect to > the A record. > > Though I've never tried it for domains that lack an MX DNS entry, I do > think overall that DMARC (and SPF) are both good things to configure > for domains that don't send email. I've blogged about it here: > https://www.spamresource.com/2018/06/locking-down-your-unused-domains.html > > Cheers, > Al > On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 9:52 AM Zachary Aab via dmarc-discuss > <dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org> wrote: > > > > The sub/domain should be protected by the DMARC record even without an > MX record, I can't find anything in the RFC to say otherwise and some > senders (mostly marketing, ime) use 5322.from domains with no MX records > and a "Reply-to:" header with a working domain. > > > > >Could the syntax error caused by the receiving domain may not have the > txt record to authorize the reports reception? > > It certainly could, of course we can't check up on that without the > domain. The answer will probably depend on what is actually throwing the > syntax error, is it a DMARC-checking tool on the internet, a receiver's > DMARC filter, or your DNS provider? > > > > It looks like your last clause (rua=) is missing the semicolon at the > end, receivers will care about that to varying degrees but it might be > causing the error you see, again depending on what's giving the error. > > > > My best, > > Zack Aab > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 9:37 PM T Nguyen via dmarc-discuss < > dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org> wrote: > >> > >> Could the syntax error caused by the receiving domain may not have the > txt record to authorize the reports reception? > >> > >> > >> > >> From: T Nguyen <t.nguye...@outlook.com> > >> Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2018 9:30 PM > >> To: dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org > >> Subject: Help > >> > >> > >> > >> Appreciate any insight to the scenario below: > >> > >> > >> > >> Can non-smtp ( no mx record ) domain example.com be protected by > dmarc? I inherited the below dmarc record for this example.com with spf > record as “ v=spf1 -all “. The result was a dmarc syntax error. > >> > >> > >> > >> v=DMARC1; p=reject; pct=100; rua=mailto:dmarc-repo...@not-example.com > ,mailto:repo...@example-not.com > >> > >> > >> > >> If dmarc cannot be implemented then what is the best way to protect > this non-smtp domain example.com from being spoofed by mal-intention > senders that can fool naïve users? Although with spf record “ v=spf1 -all > “alone should work for dmarc record to set policy reject all email using > this non-email domain example.com > >> > >> > >> > >> Thank you in advance, > >> > >> Best, > >> > >> tn > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> dmarc-discuss mailing list > >> dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org > >> http://www.dmarc.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc-discuss > >> > >> NOTE: Participating in this list means you agree to the DMARC Note Well > terms (http://www.dmarc.org/note_well.html) > > > > _______________________________________________ > > dmarc-discuss mailing list > > dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org > > http://www.dmarc.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc-discuss > > > > NOTE: Participating in this list means you agree to the DMARC Note Well > terms (http://www.dmarc.org/note_well.html) > > > > -- > al iverson // 312-725-0130 // miami > http://www.aliverson.com > http://www.spamresource.com > > _______________________________________________ > dmarc-discuss mailing list > dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org > http://www.dmarc.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc-discuss > > NOTE: Participating in this list means you agree to the DMARC Note Well > terms (http://www.dmarc.org/note_well.html)
_______________________________________________ dmarc-discuss mailing list dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org http://www.dmarc.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc-discuss NOTE: Participating in this list means you agree to the DMARC Note Well terms (http://www.dmarc.org/note_well.html)
