I don't understand what "demeaning a domain's policy" means.

On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 10:20 AM Alessandro Vesely <ves...@tana.it> wrote:

> On Fri 28/May/2021 17:43:37 +0200 Todd Herr wrote:
> >
> > Consensus on Ticket #47 <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/dmarc/ticket/47>
> (Removal
> > of "pct" tag) was reached during the May 27 DMARC Interim to keep the
> tag, but
> > to rewrite its definition in whole or in part to make its usage better
> understood.
>
>
> I think the text in RFC 7489 is quite good.  Perhaps a word could be added
> for
> pct=0; for example:
>
> OLD
>     pct:  (plain-text integer between 0 and 100, inclusive; OPTIONAL;
>        default is 100).  Percentage of messages from the Domain Owner's
>        mail stream to which the DMARC policy is to be applied.  However,
>        this MUST NOT be applied to the DMARC-generated reports, all of
>        which must be sent and received unhindered.  The purpose of the
>        "pct" tag is to allow Domain Owners to enact a slow rollout
>        enforcement of the DMARC mechanism.  The prospect of "all or
>        nothing" is recognized as preventing many organizations from
>        experimenting with strong authentication-based mechanisms.  See
>        Section 6.6.4 for details.  Note that random selection based on
>        this percentage, such as the following pseudocode, is adequate:
>
>         if (random mod 100) < pct then
>           selected = true
>         else
>           selected = false
>
> NEW
>     pct:  (plain-text integer between 0 and 100, inclusive; OPTIONAL;
>        default is 100).  Percentage of messages from the Domain Owner's
>        mail stream to which the DMARC policy is to be applied.  However,
>        this MUST NOT be applied to any other use, such as skipping DMARC
>        reports or demeaning a domain's policy.  The purpose of the
>        "pct" tag is to allow Domain Owners to enact a slow rollout
>        enforcement of the DMARC mechanism.  Using this tag, organizations
>        can experiment with strong authentication-based mechanisms while
>        lowering or even voiding the risk of non-delivery.  See Section
> 6.6.4
>        for details.  Note that random selection based on this percentage,
>        such as the following pseudocode, is adequate:
>
>         if (random mod 100) < pct then
>           selected = true
>         else
>           selected = false
>
> jm2c
> Ale
> --
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dmarc mailing list
> dmarc@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
>
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
dmarc@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc

Reply via email to