> On Jul 25, 2019, at 12:06 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy <superu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 4:45 PM Steve Atkins <st...@wordtothewise.com> wrote:
> > It's interesting that the industry has decided to interpret "p=reject;
> > pct=0" the way we intended "p=quarantine; pct=100".
>
> It's semi-explicitly defined that way in the RFC, isn't it?
>
> If so, we should fix it because (a) I don't think that's how we intended it,
> and (b) in any case, nothing in there should be only semi-explicit.
rfc 7489 6.6.4
"If email is subject to the DMARC policy of "reject", the Mail
Receiver SHOULD reject the message (see Section 10.3). If the email
is not subject to the "reject" policy (due to the "pct" tag), the
Mail Receiver SHOULD treat the email as though the "quarantine"
policy applies. This behavior allows Domain Owners to experiment
with progressively stronger policies without relaxing existing
policy."
It's pretty clear and well-defined; the case we're talking about, "p=reject;
pct=0", is
just a special case of this general rule.
All emails will not be subject to the "reject" policy due to the pct=0 tag, so
the mail
receiver should treat all emails as though the policy "quarantine" applies
(which
is the same as "p=quarantine; pct=100").
Cheers,
Steve
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
dmarc@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
