> On Apr 16, 2024, at 2:18 PM, Todd Herr
> <todd.herr=40valimail....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>
>
> Colleagues,
>
> DMARCbis currently describes the value of 'n' for the 'psd' tag in a policy
> record as follows:
>
> The DMARC policy record is published for a PSD, but it is not the
> Organizational Domain for itself and its subdomain. There is no need to put
> psd=n in a DMARC record, except in the very unusual case of a parent PSD
> publishing a DMARC record without the requisite psd=y tag.
>
> I don't think this is entirely accurate, especially the second sentence ("no
> need ... except in the very unusual case"), and here's why. Either that, or
> the description of the Tree Walk needs to be changed.
>
> The Tree Walk is intended for both DMARC Policy discovery and Organizational
> Domain discovery, and section 4.7 (DMARC Policy Discovery) says the policy to
> be applied will be the DMARC record found at one of these three locations:
> The RFC5322.From domain
> The Organizational Domain of the RFC5322.From domain
> The Public Suffix Domain of the RFC5322.From domain
> Meanwhile, section 4.8, Organizational Domain Discovery, gives the following
> three options for where the Organizational Domain is:
> DMARC record with psd=n
> The domain one level below the domain with a DMARC record with the tag psd=y
> The record for the domain with the fewest number of labels.
> The Tree Walk, as described in section 4.6, defines two explicit places to
> stop, both of which rely on discovery of a DMARC policy record with a psd tag
> defined.
One of your concerns is that without a PSD tag, but I think the default is
PSD=n. Does,that address that concern or did I misunderstand the concern?
N
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
dmarc@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
