I think it's getting better, but I wouldn't call them Internet Naming
Authorities. Should we just call them higher-level entities? Also, while the
biggest help that PSD DMARC would make is for non-existent organizational
domains, it can also help with other domains that haven't expressed a
Even for .mil, the vast majority of email domains are fairly short with four or
fewer labels. Most of the other ones tend to be individual servers that send
automatic performance emails, and I think should be considered more of an edge
case and less of our concern.
Thanks,
Eric Chudow
Thank you, John. I agree that it's an edge case and not worth addressing
separately.
Eric Chudow
DoD Cybersecurity Mitigations
-Original Message-
From: John Levine
Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2020 11:04 PM
To: dmarc@ietf.org
Cc: Chudow, Eric B CIV NSA DSAW (USA)
Subject: Re: [dmarc
For domains and organizational domains that have DMARC policies, then there is
no difference. For ones that don't, there is only one extra check and I think
that often it will be cached to minimize the actual lookups needed in practice.
Thanks,
Eric Chudow
DoD Cybersecurity Mitigations
From:
Section 2.7. defines a non-existent domain as "a domain for which there is an
NXDOMAIN or NODATA response for A, , and MX records. This is a broader
definition than that in NXDOMAIN [RFC8020]." This should be sufficient for
determining that the domain is not intended to be used and
On Tuesday, February 04, 2020 3:44 PM Scott Kitterman wrote:
> As designed, the experiment is self-contained: For senders, it only affects
> PSDs that have been listed as participants. For receivers, it only affects
> receivers that choose to deploy code to do the additional check related to
>
On September 5, 2019 8:22:27 PM UTC, Dave Crocker wrote:
>On 9/4/2019 6:28 AM, Dave Crocker wrote:
>> ence my current view that:
>>
>> 1. The change to DMARC should be limited to permitting the query for
>the
>> organization domain to be anywhere in the DNS tree, including a TLD.
>> Within
Scott, good point about the interoperability issue for the ‘np’ tag. I hadn’t
really thought about that. Since what we do here for PSD DMARC will hopefully
be included in regular DMARC for the future as well, I agree that it makes that
we should not have the default behavior be different than
I recently joined this working group from the United States Department of
Defense (DoD), which runs the .mil TLD. We appreciate all the work that has
been done so far on DMARC and are currently investing significant efforts to
implement DMARC broadly across DoD domains. We value and support
