On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 10:55 AM Alessandro Vesely wrote:
> On Thu 14/Mar/2024 15:47:14 +0100 Todd Herr wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 5:19 AM Alessandro Vesely
> wrote:
> >> On 12/03/2024 03:18, Neil Anuskiewicz wrote:
> >> > Please remove the pct tag from the spec.
> >>
> >> It has been
What if we were to look at re-writing this in a way that says something
like this:
In the case of optional DMARC flags (ex: sp, adkim, aspf, pct) that are
malformed, the processing system SHOULD ignore them as invalid inputs, and
MUST utilize the valid flags that are mandatory (ex: v, p) and
I also agree that "SHOULD NOT" would be my vote as the preferred language
going forward.
~
Matt
On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 12:41 PM Dotzero wrote:
> I'd like to first thank Francesca for taking the time to review where the
> working group is as far as consensus.
>
> I fall into the "SHOULD NOT"
On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 3:17 PM Michael Thomas wrote:
> How do I know when I'm done though if I don't know the IP addresses who
> send on my behalf? Is it an actual forgery or is it Marsha in marketing
> using a outsourced email blaster?
>
This is solved with conversation with the relevant
