On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 4:06 AM Douglas Foster < dougfoster.emailstanda...@gmail.com> wrote:
> [...] > > Does our document really handle all 15 of these combinations? > I think the answer is "yes". Do you see something different? > One thing that falls out of this recap is that when the verification state > is MATCH, the policy is only used for a reporting destination. If the > evaluator sends RUF reports, then the reporting destination is needed > immediately. If the evaluator only sends RUA reports, then then the > reporting destination lookup can be deferred to report processing time, > where it can be retrieved once per aggregate rather than once per message. > If the evaluator does not send reports, the reporting destination, and > therefore the policy, is not needed at all. > Under MATCH, for a verifier that doesn't send reports, that's correct. Are you implying this is a defect in the document that needs correction? I think it's not stated explicitly, in the way you've done here, but I don't think that means the document fails to cover this. -MSK
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
