On Mon 06/Dec/2021 23:23:37 +0100 Tim Wicinski wrote:
On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 8:57 AM Scott Kitterman <skl...@kitterman.com
<mailto:skl...@kitterman.com>> wrote:
Unless there's a valid reason for someone to publish PSD=no, I don't think
it should exist and I can't think of a reason. If you give people a knob,
someone will turn it [if we leave it in, I guarantee you there will be
things written about how essential it is to have psd=no in your DMARC
record].
What Scott says here. It can not be said enough. People will attempt anything
and everything. Make it simple, and precise.
Then the same holds for t=. Apart from the fact that there's nothing ambiguous
in saying psd=no, a handy rule for boolean tags would be that they default to
"no", but if they appear without value in a record, the assumed value is "yes".
Best
Ale
--
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
dmarc@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
