Re: [dmarc-discuss] wanted: rfc number
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 12:15 PM, A. Schulze via dmarc-discuss < dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org> wrote: > > Alec Peterson via dmarc-discuss: > > Why force the report generator to do something that could be done when the >> report is received, if desired? >> > > because > - the MTA already did the rDNS job > - I send the failure reports to myself. I still "see" the Source-IP field > which has not so much information... > Add the smtp.helo from SPF in the authentication results, this is the next best thing. More often than not it matches the rDNS. ___ 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)
Re: [dmarc-discuss] wanted: rfc number
On 9/29/2015 6:57 AM, Chris Meidinger via dmarc-discuss wrote: > I believe it is a https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6591 in extension of > https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5965. could be useful to upgrade the format to include a citation to the document that specifies the format. that way recipients who are unfamiliar with the form could find the pointer in the message they receive... d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net ___ 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)
Re: [dmarc-discuss] wanted: rfc number
Andreas wrote:
> because
> - the MTA already did the rDNS job
> - I send the failure reports to myself. I still "see" the Source-IP
> field which has not so much information...
As you're not aiming for machine consumption, there's no need for a new field.
Just use a comment:
Source-IP: 10.0.0.1 (something.example.com)
RFC 5965 3.5:
source-ip = "Source-IP:" [CFWS]
( IPv4-address-literal /
IPv6-address-literal ) [CFWS] CRLF
RFC 5322 3.2.2:
comment = "(" *([FWS] ccontent) [FWS] ")"
CFWS = (1*([FWS] comment) [FWS]) / FWS
- Roland
___
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)
Re: [dmarc-discuss] wanted: rfc number
Alec Peterson via dmarc-discuss: Why force the report generator to do something that could be done when the report is received, if desired? because - the MTA already did the rDNS job - I send the failure reports to myself. I still "see" the Source-IP field which has not so much information... Andreas ___ 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)
