On July 18, 2022 9:37:25 AM UTC, Alessandro Vesely <ves...@tana.it> wrote:
>
>
>On Sun 17/Jul/2022 17:09:06 +0200 Scott Kitterman wrote:
>>> Without John's change in the other step 2, that of Section 4.6, this step 2
>>> should have been worded differently, but the concept is that a PSD which
>>> sends mail or signs messages should be treated as a regular
>>> (sub)domain,/within/ the process. That is, without taking recourse to the
>>> statement, put after the process steps:
>>>
>>> If this process does not determine the Organizational Domain, then
>>> the initial target domain is the Organizational Domain.
>> That's the one.
>>
>>> Recall that you corrected me on March 21st:
>>> mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/VmB5_CMIrm9rulqlkILMMEw_nW8
>>>
>> Yes.
>
>
>At that time the process would stop on psd=y even at the entry point. So
>John's change fixed it, in part.
>
>
>> I don't understand what you are arguing for the WG to do. I believe that
>> you are agreeing that the current text gets the desired result and yet you
>> still want to change it because it should have been different if Section 4.6
>> was different.
>
>
>The reason I want to change it is that a mail From: <faked@com> brings the
>tree walk process to conclude that .com is an organizational domain, which is
>wrong.
>
>I think the best way to avoid confusing the reader is to make sharp
>definitions to start with. We have these unimportant abnormal PSDs which we
>don't want to mention because they don't happen. However, logically oriented
>readers will spot the inconsistency and be confused.
>
Since com. doesn't have a DMARC record, the case is already addressed. Early
in Section 4.8 there's a list of conditions where you don't even look for the
organizational domain. On of them is:
No applicable DMARC policy is discovered for the RFC5322.From domain during the
first tree walk. In this case, the DMARC mechanism does not apply to the
message in question.
That would be the controlling point in your scenario.
It might make sense to remove the word 'Note:'.
Scott K
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
dmarc@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
