>Am 25.08.2017 um 19:22 schrieb Marc Luescher via dmarc-discuss:
>> I did not find any guideline how to do this.
>
>https://www.m3aawg.org/documents/en/m3aawg-protecting-parked-domains-best-common-practices
Assuming you mean domains that neither send nor receive e-mail, the M3AAWG
document
is
Marc,
Strictly speaking, you don't need the SPF record; however, I strongly
recommend you publish a "permit none" SPF record as many corporate gateways
that don't support DMARC (or don't have validation enabled) will still
block fraudulent messages based on an SPF record.
v=spf1 -all
Best
Hi Marc,
your idea is right in my opinion.
You do need a valid SPF (but may be a „-all“ thats your choice, because you
don’t send for that domain mails) record. But no DKIM, because you don’t send
emails.
But enough of talking, i think an example helps more:
Domain 1 (master)
_dmarc
DMARC.
--Terry
From: dmarc-discuss [mailto:dmarc-discuss-boun...@dmarc.org] On Behalf Of Marc
Luescher via dmarc-discuss
Sent: Friday, August 25, 2017 10:23 AM
To: dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org
Subject: [dmarc-discuss] DMARC and vanity domains
Hi there,
we are setting up a lot of vanity doma
Hi there,
we are setting up a lot of vanity domains to make sure they can not be used
for abuse.
main domain fresenius.com
vanity 1 fressenius.com etc
My idea was to just to create a DMARC record like :
v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:71676...@mxtoolbox.dmarc-report.com,
