On June 6, 2020 7:25:56 PM UTC, Jim Fenton <fen...@bluepopcorn.net> wrote:
>On 6/5/20 3:37 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>> On Friday, June 5, 2020 5:26:19 PM EDT Jim Fenton wrote:
>>>
>>> So maybe the core question here is, does the identity in the domain
>name
>>> matter or not? It does to me personally because I look at it
>(whenever I
>>> can -- my iPhone doesn't make it easy to display) and I pay
>attention to
>>> it. But I know I'm not a typical user, and I also see increasing
>>> evidence of mail client software that doesn't show anything but the
>>> Friendly Name. So is there a "brand" associated with the email
>domain
>>> name any more?
>>>
>>> If the domain name doesn't matter, the binding to the From/Signer
>>> address doesn't either.
>> If the domain name didn't matter, no one would bother to use 'real'
>domains in
>> abusive mail. They demonstrably do, so while one might have
>differences of
>> opinion about how important they are (every MUA I use displays them,
>so let's
>> also not draw too hasty conclusions about them not being displayed) I
>don't
>> think it's a supportable that they don't matter.
>
>And I receive a good deal of email with friendly names like "DHL
>Express" or the names of friends (who apparently have suffered address
>book compromise) but completely unrelated domain names.
>
>I phrased my comment as a question because I really don't know the
>answer to this, and have been reading comments from people asserting
>opinions on both sides. It would simplify the discussion if the WG
>could
>reach rough consensus on this. And if the domain name doesn't matter,
>the WG really needs to rethink the utility of DMARC.
I think the market has spoken on the utility of DMARC.
Scott K
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
dmarc@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
