I agree... given that changes are being made, it makes total sense to rev the version number.
- Trent From: dmarc <dmarc-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf of Emil Gustafsson <emgu=40google....@dmarc.ietf.org> Date: Thursday, February 23, 2023 at 11:18 AM To: DMARC IETF <dmarc@ietf.org> Subject: [dmarc-ietf] Pros & cons with keeping v=1 when replacing pct with t I recognize that the changes in DMARCbis without also changing v=2 are possible and don't cause a security problem as ignoring "pct" when parsers are updated should result in the more restricive policy being applied. I think however I recognize that the changes in DMARCbis without also changing v=2 are possible and don't cause a security problem as ignoring "pct" when parsers are updated should result in the more restricive policy being applied. I think however there is a practical problem. As a mailbox provider I would not want to just switch parsers but will need to examine the DMARC record and actually support both pct and t for backward compatibility just in order to not change the behavior overnight for our users. I also noticed by looking at some recent data in our logs that there is a significant number of emails received with p=quarantine or p=reject where the pct value that is neither 0 nor 100 (so not 1:1 compatible with t). I think having DMARCbis actually changing the version would simplify and keep the interpretation of DMARC records consistent. What do you think? /E
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
