It appears that Scott Kitterman <skl...@kitterman.com> said: > > >On July 9, 2022 5:07:43 PM UTC, Alessandro Vesely <ves...@tana.it> wrote: >>>> Yeah, /should/! The very fact that you yourself changed your mind about >>>> how it works, without going into the hassle >of explaining your reasoning, ... >>> >>> Um, what? Scott and I went through some rounds of debugging to be sure the >>> tree walk handled some obscure edge cases >in a reasonable way. It was all on this very mailing list with examples. I >think what we have now is OK but if you find >something in the tree walk that is unclear or gets an unreasonable result, let >us know, preferably with a concrete example. >> >>I think I received all list messages (although I don't check against your >>weekly count) an I read all of them. Perhaps >I've been inattentive, but I don't recall the switch from stop on psd=y to >continue on psd=y if it's the first lookup. Any >pointer? > >I don't recall having changed this. If you can check the previous draft >revisions to see when it changed, maybe I could >find it. I'm confident that any changes to the way the tree walk works have >been discussed on the list.
I changed it in a pull request a few weeks ago. If you don't stop on the first psd=y that is not the original domain, you get the wrong result if there are DMARC records above the psd=y. I sent this example on June 21, link is https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/T-8NX63L8ilHPhHXMygKdTJ6zMM/ a NXDOMAIN (or psd=y, doesn't matter) b.a blah c.b.a psd=y d.c.b.a blah e.d.c.b.a NXDOMAIN I think the org domain for e.d.c.b.a is d.c.b.a. If you don't stop at the psd=y, you get b.a as the org domain which still looks wrong to me. The description in the current draft gets d.c.b.a. R's, John _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
