On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 2:33 PM Doug Foster <fosterd=
40bayviewphysicians....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:

> If I followed Neil’s discussion of MajorCRM:
>
>
>
> The current DMARC architecture supports authorizing a vendor to mail on
> behalf of their clients if the client includes them in their SPF policy or
> delegates a DKIM scope to them and they use it.
>

And client's domain is only in the Mail from uses the vendor's domain (
somevendorxyz123.foo.com). It passes SPF in but it's not in alignment with
the organizational domain name (example.com) that the client uses in the
header from.

This is super common and, as a practical matter, it works... except if you
ever want to use DMARC's policy for anything other than reporting. The vast
majority of people think that if you add include:bar.com (whatever vendor
KB says) in the SPF that they are good to go. So many businesses have
several entries in their organizational domain's SPF record yet the
RFC5321.from
is the vendor's domain. The client sometimes goes over the 10 DNS lookups
with includes that aren't doing anything for them. I'm not sure that 10 DNS
lookup limit. There are some prominent services of various sorts for which
the single include will do over 10 DNS lookups and hat's just one of many
includes a client might have (I know this isn't about SPF per se).

Yes, I can usually quickly set up a subdomain to use instead of
somevendorxyz123.foo.com but this isn't always possible or it requires
pushing to get it done.

This makes DMARC a sketchy tool to use for any policy above none which is
in and of itself useful.
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
dmarc@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc

Reply via email to