Thanks! And a valid point. :) Al
On Mon, Mar 9, 2020 at 3:39 PM Kurt Andersen (DMARC) <kurta+dm...@drkurt.com> wrote: > > If the signature is not broken, then having DKIM pass is sufficient for a > DMARC pass (per the spec). Whether Exchange evaluates it correctly or not is > a different question :-) > > --Kurt > > On Mon, Mar 9, 2020 at 1:33 PM Al Iverson via dmarc-discuss > <dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org> wrote: >> >> Dumb question time. In that scenario, if mail is forwarded with the >> DKIM signature intact, would that be good enough to still pass DMARC? >> Or will it fail because SPF now fails? >> >> Al >> >> On Mon, Mar 9, 2020 at 2:25 PM Ivan Kovachev via dmarc-discuss >> <dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org> wrote: >> > >> > If only I could push them. >> > >> > On Mon, Mar 9, 2020, 18:32 Kurt Andersen <ku...@drkurt.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> This is not a topic for the DMARC protocol discussion list. You should >> >> probably be directing the inquiry to your Exchange support channel - and >> >> pushing Barracuda to implement ARC (RFC8617) too :-) >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> Kurt Andersen >> >> >> >> On Mon, Mar 9, 2020 at 11:20 AM Ivan Kovachev via dmarc-discuss >> >> <dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Hello, It looks like Office 365 with a gateway in front such as >> >>> Barracuda or another gateway, still does DMARC validation inbound, and >> >>> quarantines any emails that fail DMARC validation. >> >>> >> >>> Should this not be the case since the MX of the receiving domain is that >> >>> of the Barracuda or whatever other gateway is used? >> >>> >> >>> DMARC validation passes at Barracuda, but then Barracuda makes changes >> >>> to the email which invalidates DKIM/DMARC and Office 365 quarantines >> >>> them, even though the email initially passed DMARC and was not >> >>> considered as SPAM at all. >> >>> >> >>> How can DMARC validation be turned off or disabled at Office 365 for the >> >>> above scenario? >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> _______________________________________________ >> >>> 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 // wombatmail // chicago >> dns tools are cool! https://xnnd.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) -- al iverson // wombatmail // chicago dns tools are cool! https://xnnd.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)
