>I think you're right on both counts, and that's what I used to think
>too. I know SPF, a bit about DKIM, and still less about DMARC, but I
>think DMARC complains because although SPF and DKIM are individually
>happy the headers are not in `alignment': DKIM's are still upstream
>compared to SPF.
Hi Ken,
Happy New Year! :-)
> And thinking about it ... I don't think the normal usage of dist(1)
> SHOULD cause any problems. With regards to SPF, since it uses the
> MAIL FROM header that should be fine, since your MAIL FROM should be
> set properly to the identity of the dist(1)er. Since
>I haven't studied it in any detail yet, and don't know when I will find
>the time, but I thought it existence might be of interest to some on the
>list, and wondered if dist(1) and others would be users of this new
>technique.
My brief reading of ARC is that it is intended for mailing list
Hi,
Whilst investigating a friend's question about ~/.forward in the age of
DMARC, etc., I came across Authenticated Received Chain for email that
seems to be heading to an RFC.
ARC is intended to be used by Internet Mail Handlers who forward or
resend messages, with or without
