>Please submit "stuff" that needs to be fixed The worst problem is still section 3.1.2.3 which needs to be deleted, since most of what it says is wrong, and what little isn't wrong is irrelevant.
RFC 6854 is not about EAI, since an ASCII MUA can create mail with an empty group From: as easily as an EAI MUA. The assertion that RFC 6854 allows empty groups "during the transition period to SMTPUTF8" is false. Empty group syntax has nothing to do with DMARC since there is no domain on the From: line to check. From a DMARC point of view, there is no difference between a From: with an empty group and one with an address in a domain that publishes no DMARC record. This sentence is completely false. EAI MTAs never downgrade mail in transit: If an EAI/SMTPUTF8-aware MTA needs to transmit a message to a non- aware MTA, the EAI/SMTPUTF8-aware system may transform the RFC5322.From header field of the message to include group syntax to allow the non-aware MTA to receive the email. Section 4.1.2.3 is equally wrong for the same reasons and also needs to go. Section 4.1.3.1 doesn't mention rewriting the From: address to a valid forwarding address in a domain for which the list can sign. It's not just me doing it, LISTSERV can do that, it's widely implemented. Take out .invalid, nobody does that because (as I discovered and you mention) many spam filters dislike From: addresses with domains that don't resolve. R's, John _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
