> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Scott > Kitterman > Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2012 8:49 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [marf] Additional dkim-reporting report type requests > > OK. I would say that's not an SPF result at all.
Right; I would say it's a Verifier policy override of an SPF result, and possible something a sender might want to know about. But that's because I come from the DKIM side of things. The difference is probably in the specs themselves: DKIM has always talked about the fact that a Verifier could render a signature failed for any reason it wants (e.g., last paragraph of Section 6.1.1 of RFC6376) even if all the bits line up to produce a valid signature, and I'm guessing SPF has always put policy stuff like that out of scope. -MSK _______________________________________________ marf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf
