On 04/27/2014 11:00 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
> One question I have had over how this works is why SPF is added to the
> mix. If the message passes SPF, then it has come directly from a server
> that is supposedly controlled by the sending provider. Said server
> should have been able to DKIM sign
On 4/27/14, 1:34 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 04/27/2014 10:16 AM, Lindsay Haisley wrote:
>> My understanding is that DMARC alignment depends on both SPF and DKIM
>> and that if a test using either protocol passes, then a DMARC will pass.
>> This is probably an oversimplification, but I'm exploring
On Sun, 2014-04-27 at 10:34 -0700, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> On 04/27/2014 10:16 AM, Lindsay Haisley wrote:
> > My understanding is that DMARC alignment depends on both SPF and DKIM
> > and that if a test using either protocol passes, then a DMARC will pass.
> > This is probably an oversimplification, b
On 04/27/2014 10:16 AM, Lindsay Haisley wrote:
> My understanding is that DMARC alignment depends on both SPF and DKIM
> and that if a test using either protocol passes, then a DMARC will pass.
> This is probably an oversimplification, but I'm exploring the idea of
> whether it might be possible to
My understanding is that DMARC alignment depends on both SPF and DKIM
and that if a test using either protocol passes, then a DMARC will pass.
This is probably an oversimplification, but I'm exploring the idea of
whether it might be possible to interpose a milter using OpenDKIM
(perhaps zdkimfilter