On Monday, April 27, 2015 11:25 PM [GMT+1=CET], John Levine wrote: > > Couldn't the DMARC specification spell out that Receivers claiming > > to be DMARC-compliant, when choosing to *accept* incoming messages > > from Senders publishing p=reject (irrespective of whether such > > accepted messages passed or not the DMARC checks), CANNOT > > after-the-fact reinject such received messages into the public > > email infrastructure in any way that could render them (or reveal > > them to be) DMARC-rejectable? > > Since there is no spec for "Receivers claiming to be DMARC-compliant" > and there never will be, of course not.
What? There is an spec for DMARC. With the current DMARC specification, anyone can do almost anything and still claim to be DMARC-compliant. What about if to claim being DMARC-compliant, Receivers could not reinject alien messages into the email infrastructure if the original Sender is publishing p=reject and said reinjected messages would fail a DMARC check when performed by its ultimate Recipient(s)? Regards, J.Gomez _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
