On 6/14/21 10:09, Brotman, Alex wrote: > Does this make everyone cringe, or perhaps worth a larger discussion?
This was considered (repeatedly) during the original DMARC work, and I believe again while it was being put into RFC7489 form. It was rejected because it increased the likelihood of broken/invalid records for the overwhelming majority, while providing complexity that relatively few senders wanted. And they could usually get what they wanted by other means. I would not be in favor of adding more complex policy expressions. --S. _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
