Tomki pointed out that I am completely wrong about selectors and lots of people report them. I should have checked.
Elizabeth zwi...@otoh.org > On Jul 7, 2016, at 11:38 AM, Steven M Jones <s...@crash.com> wrote: > > I'm quoting the following response in a thread from the > dmarc-disc...@dmarc.org mailing list, because I think it identifies work > items or at least questions this WG may want to address. If this is > already captured somewhere, my apologies. > > Here's the original thread: > > http://lists.dmarc.org/pipermail/dmarc-discuss/2016-July/003546.html > > > Summary: How should DMARC aggregate reports reflect messages with > multiple DKIM results? And should DKIM selectors be included in DMARC > aggregate reports? > > >> On 07/07/2016 09:16, Elizabeth Zwicky via dmarc-discuss wrote: >> >> And yes, it's entirely possible for a message to have 2 or more DKIM >> signatures, including signatures for the same domain with different >> results. As long as there exists a DKIM signature that is aligned and >> passes, the DMARC DKIM result is pass. (As I recall, the spec is unclear >> about what you do if there are multiple DKIM results. That should >> probably be fixed and it would be nice if we allowed the selector to be >> reported as well.) > > AND: > >> On 07/07/2016 09:53, Elizabeth Zwicky via dmarc-discuss wrote: >> >> I meant to say that the spec is unclear about what you do about >> **reporting** multiple DKIM results. It's perfectly clear on how to >> evaluate them. > > _______________________________________________ > dmarc mailing list > dmarc@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
