----- Original Message -----
> From: "Barry Leiba" <barryle...@computer.org>
> To: "Dave Crocker" <dcroc...@gmail.com>, "Murray Kucherawy"
> <superu...@gmail.com>
> Cc: dmarc@ietf.org
> Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2014 9:53:15 AM
> Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC's purpose
>
> > 2. The spec is clear about how it works and what the implications are.
> > The
> > issue with mailing lists is well-documented.
>
> aI'm not sure that any issue with mailing lists is documented in
> draft-kucherawy-dmarc-base at all, well or otherwise. A search for
> "mailing list" (or even "mailing") shows hits in three places, all in
> back matter, none of substance.
>
> There's nothing that I can see anywhere that warns of possible
> consequences (neither considerations for the domain publishing the
> policy nor discussion of collateral damage to mailing lists) of using
> "p=reject" -- not in the explanation of "p=reject", not in Section 6
> ("Policy Enforcement Considerations"), not in Section 15.4 ("Rejecting
> Messages"), not in the Security Considerations.
>
> Where is is well documented?
>
In the upcoming BCP
Should we also document in this Murray's draft that MS-Exchange breaks DKIM on
forwarding, inventory all the operational cases? I don't think so. The draft is
to describe the protocol, the BCP is here to document on how to operationally
deploy and use it.
The reviews if I recall suggested to limit the draft to the protocol bits
strictly.
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
dmarc@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
