On Wed, Dec 24, 2014 at 4:04 AM, Scott Kitterman <skl...@kitterman.com> wrote:
> The draft strongly encourages DMARC implementers to ignore SPF policy, so > I don't think assuming messages will be deferred due only due to SPF or > DKIM results indicating a temporary DNS error is appropriate. > If there's a transient DNS error getting the SPF policy, then there's no SPF policy to be ignored. That's quite a different situation. > I think that in the case of a temporary DNS error in one of the lower > level protocols, insufficient inputs are available to conclude a message > has failed DMARC tests. > I agree. > Receivers can either ignore DMARC for this message due to incomplete > evaluation or they can defer the message in the hope that the temporary > error will be resolved when the message is retried. Receivers MUST NOT > apply DMARC policy and reject or quarantine because the DMARC evaluation is > incomplete. > Can you provide specific changes, with section numbers, that you'd like to see applied to resolve this? -MSK
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
