> On Mar 16, 2024, at 9:38 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>
> On Saturday, March 16, 2024 4:52:54 AM EDT Tero Kivinen wrote:
>> John Levine writes:
>>> It appears that Todd Herr said:
I agree that clarifying it can't hurt, obviously, ...
>>>
>>> I disagree, it does hurt.
>>>
>>> If we
On Saturday, March 16, 2024 4:52:54 AM EDT Tero Kivinen wrote:
> John Levine writes:
> > It appears that Todd Herr said:
> > >I agree that clarifying it can't hurt, obviously, ...
> >
> > I disagree, it does hurt.
> >
> > If we say you're allowed to use CNAMEs to point to DMARC records,
> >
John Levine writes:
> It appears that Todd Herr said:
> >I agree that clarifying it can't hurt, obviously, ...
>
> I disagree, it does hurt.
>
> If we say you're allowed to use CNAMEs to point to DMARC records,
> people are to say uh oh, is there something special here? What about
> DKIM
> On Mar 15, 2024, at 9:40 AM, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
>
> On Fri 15/Mar/2024 02:34:15 +0100 Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
>>> On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 9:11 AM John Levine wrote:
>>> It appears that Todd Herr said:
>>> >I agree that clarifying it can't hurt, obviously, ...
>>>
>>> I
On Fri 15/Mar/2024 02:34:15 +0100 Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 9:11 AM John Levine wrote:
It appears that Todd Herr said:
>I agree that clarifying it can't hurt, obviously, ...
I disagree, it does hurt.
If we say you're allowed to use CNAMEs to point to DMARC
(I haven't digged a lot, just on the fly stats)
it's either an "SPF" CNAME or wildcard TXT records
Olivier
De: "Mark Alley"
À: "dmarc"
Envoyé: Jeudi 14 Mars 2024 21:28:11
Objet: Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARCbis WGLC Issue 136 - DMARC Records Can Be CNAMEs
If
On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 9:11 AM John Levine wrote:
> It appears that Todd Herr said:
> >I agree that clarifying it can't hurt, obviously, ...
>
> I disagree, it does hurt.
>
> If we say you're allowed to use CNAMEs to point to DMARC records,
> people are to say uh oh, is there something
On 3/14/2024 6:11 PM, John Levine wrote:
It appears that Todd Herr said:
I agree that clarifying it can't hurt, obviously, ...
I disagree, it does hurt.
If we say you're allowed to use CNAMEs to point to DMARC records,
people are to say uh oh, is there something special here? What about
It appears that Todd Herr said:
>I agree that clarifying it can't hurt, obviously, ...
I disagree, it does hurt.
If we say you're allowed to use CNAMEs to point to DMARC records,
people are to say uh oh, is there something special here? What about
DKIM records? what about SPF records? how
It appears that Todd Herr said:
>The reasons given were:
>
> 1. https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5863#section-4.1
I am reasonably sure it was referring to DNS crudware that wouldn't
let you put an underscore in the name, or that limited TXT records to
a single 255 byte string, not CNAMEs.
>
"Explaining how DNS works is out of scope."
Scott is right.
Also, some folks point use something other than CNAME
$ dig +noall +answer _dmarc.valimail.com ns
_dmarc.valimail.com. 300 IN NS ns.vali.email.
tjw@m2[1098]: dig +noall +answer _dmarc.valimail.com txt
_dmarc.valimail.com. 595 IN TXT
On March 14, 2024 8:38:17 PM UTC, Todd Herr
wrote:
>On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 4:34 PM Scott Kitterman
>wrote:
>
>>
>> I think this is correct. I think it's obviously enough correct that I'm
>> surprised anyone was confused.
>>
>> Do we know what the theory was that led people to think
On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 5:05 PM Mark Alley wrote:
> On 3/14/2024 3:49 PM, Todd Herr wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 4:43 PM Mark Alley 40tekmarc@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>
>> On 3/14/2024 3:38 PM, Todd Herr wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 4:34 PM Scott Kitterman
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
On 3/14/2024 3:49 PM, Todd Herr wrote:
On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 4:43 PM Mark Alley
wrote:
On 3/14/2024 3:38 PM, Todd Herr wrote:
On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 4:34 PM Scott Kitterman
wrote:
I think this is correct. I think it's obviously enough
correct that I'm
There are folks who publish NS records at _dmarc.example.com that point to
some super fancy DNS service that return DMARC TXT records.
tim
On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 4:19 PM Todd Herr wrote:
> Colleagues,
>
> There was a discussion among M3AAWG members on March 13 that centered on
> the question
On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 4:43 PM Mark Alley wrote:
> On 3/14/2024 3:38 PM, Todd Herr wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 4:34 PM Scott Kitterman
> wrote:
>
>>
>> I think this is correct. I think it's obviously enough correct that I'm
>> surprised anyone was confused.
>>
>> Do we know what the
- Mark Alley
On 3/14/2024 3:38 PM, Todd Herr wrote:
On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 4:34 PM Scott Kitterman
wrote:
I think this is correct. I think it's obviously enough correct
that I'm surprised anyone was confused.
Do we know what the theory was that led people to think otherwise?
On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 4:34 PM Scott Kitterman
wrote:
>
> I think this is correct. I think it's obviously enough correct that I'm
> surprised anyone was confused.
>
> Do we know what the theory was that led people to think otherwise?
>
> Seems to me we don't really need this, but maybe there's
On March 14, 2024 8:18:31 PM UTC, Todd Herr
wrote:
>Colleagues,
>
>There was a discussion among M3AAWG members on March 13 that centered on
>the question of whether DMARC records can be published in DNS as CNAMEs,
>e.g.,
>
>_dmarc.example.com IN CNAME _dmarc.example.org
>
>_dmarc.example.org
If we need some real world examples of this, got a few here:
_dmarc.oit.alabama.gov
_dmarc.tjx.com
_dmarc.walmart.com
_dmarc.novanta.com
- Mark Alley
On 3/14/2024 3:18 PM, Todd Herr wrote:
Colleagues,
There was a discussion among M3AAWG members on March 13 that centered
on the question
Colleagues,
There was a discussion among M3AAWG members on March 13 that centered on
the question of whether DMARC records can be published in DNS as CNAMEs,
e.g.,
_dmarc.example.com IN CNAME _dmarc.example.org
_dmarc.example.org IN TXT "v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=
mailto:dmarc-repo...@example.org
21 matches
Mail list logo
