On Thursday, March 7, 2024 8:55:55 AM EDT Todd Herr wrote: > On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 5:08 AM Alessandro Vesely <ves...@tana.it> wrote: > > On 06/03/2024 21:00, Todd Herr wrote: > > > Section 4.7, DMARC Policy Discovery, starts with the following sentence: > > > For policy discovery, a DNS Tree Walk starts at the domain found in > > > the RFC5322.From header of the message being evaluated. > > > > > > I think the above is muddy, [...] > > > > > > When it comes to policy discovery, if the RFC5322.From domain has a > > > published policy record, it's the policy regardless of the value of the > > > 'psd' tag, is it not? Step 2 of the Tree Walk would seem to indicate > > > that if such a record didn't have psd=n then the Tree Walk would > > > continue for policy discovery. > > > > > > I believe that the first sentence in Section 4.7 should be replaced as > > > > > > follows: > > > For policy discovery, first query for a DMARC policy record at the > > > name created by prepending the label "_dmarc" to the RFC5322.From > > > domain. If no valid DMARC policy record is found there, then perform > > > a DNS Tree Walk starting with the parent domain of the RFC5322.From > > > domain. > > > > That's not exact. If the From: domain has more than 5 labels you don't > > start with its parent domain. > > > > My take: > > Policy discovery starts by querying the DMARC record for the > > RFC5322.From domain, as in step 1 of the DNS Tree Walk. If a record > > is found there, that's the policy record, otherwise continue the > > DNS Tree Walk . > > You are of course correct, Ale; thank you for spotting my error.
I've reviewed the text in the rev 31 branch in Git (which is essentially what's above) and I think this is good. Scott K _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
