On 6/17/20 12:11 PM, Pete Resnick wrote: > On 17 Jun 2020, at 13:27, Dave Crocker wrote: > >> DMARC has nothing to do with display of author information to a >> recipient, and everything to do with differential handling by a >> receiving filtering engine. Were the Sender: field always present, >> that would be the one that DMARC should have used. > > It could have chosen the more complicated, "Sender unless not present, > in which case From". But yes, this bit I get. That said, there are > people who have argued that From: was chosen because Sender: was not > displayed. I think that's a silly argument, but it's one that people > still believe.
I'm trying to understand why alignment to any header field is important to DMARC in that case. If whatever it's aligning to is not visible, the sender can trivially achieve alignment by choosing the From: (or Sender:, whatever) address to match the domain of the DKIM signature and/or envelope-from address. I don't see how that contributes at all to differential handling by a receiving filtering engine. If it's because From: is visible, the address part of From is getting to be a lot less visible, plus typical users will ignore the address anyway. And if From: alignment doesn't matter, the mailing list can just sign the message and no rewriting is needed. -Jim _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
