Somebody determined along the way that the default minOccurs in this XML is 1. On the other hand, <sp></sp> does occur -- the question is whether it is syntactically valid for it to be null, which, as far as I can tell, it is not (it's an enumeration of strings).
As Roland points out, that leaves the question of what you're supposed to do if the sender's domain has a syntactically invalid DMARC record, and producing a matching, harmlessly incorrect report looks like the least bad option, at least unless we want to change dispositionType to have INVALID as a possible value. Elizabeth From: Tomki Camp <tc...@agari.com<mailto:tc...@agari.com>> Date: Sunday, February 23, 2014 12:07 PM To: "dmarc@ietf.org<mailto:dmarc@ietf.org>" <dmarc@ietf.org<mailto:dmarc@ietf.org>> Subject: [dmarc-ietf] XML empty sp tag I am seeing some RUA reports come in where an sp tag is present in the XML, but with no value. Such as: <policy_published> <domain>yahoo.com</domain> <adkim>r</adkim> <aspf>r</aspf> <p>none</p> <sp></sp> <pct>100</pct> </policy_published> It’s unclear to me, from the spec, whether this is allowed. The schema definition http://www.blackops.org/~msk/dmarc/draft-dmarc-base.html#xml_schema shows that PolicyPublishedType has both the p and sp elements as DispositionType, neither of them with a minOccurs. At the very least, the former probably should have that, right? What would be an appropriate way to indicate in the spec whether the empty sp tagset is allowed, and what it indicates? Regards, —Tomki
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
