On Friday, January 23, 2015 03:03:28 John Levine wrote: > >RFC 7208 doesn't say the HELO result determines anything. It says IF (I say > >again IF) a decision has been reached about message disposition based on > >the HELO result, there is no requirement to go ahead and do a pointless > >Mail From check. > > While that is certainly one plausible interpretation of the 7208 > language, it says "definitive policy result", a phrase that's not > defined anywhere, which may or may not involve a decision about mail > disposition. A "pass" result certainly strikes me as a definitive > policy result.
Pass is an SPF result. I probably should have added the word local in front of policy when I wrote that. What I wrote above isn't just a random interpretation, it's what I meant when I wrote it and what we discussed in the working group. > >Avoiding a check that has been determined to be pointless is the only > >change in this area in RFC 7208. > Indeed, and that turns out to be a lot more incompatible than was > appreciated at the time. I'm up to accepting that there's some ambiguity in the language, but I don't see any actual incompatibility assuming the ambiguity is resolved appropriately. If one changes "definitive policy result" to "definitive local policy result" or "definitive receiver policy result" then I think there's no ambiguity. I'm still a bit boggled that anyone is confused about this, but obviously they are. Scott K _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
