Opened 12 months ago

Last modified 11 months ago

#22 new task

Perverse incentives to use p!=none & pct=0

Reported by: kboth+ietf@… Owned by: draft-ietf-dmarc-interoperability@…
Priority: minor Milestone: Deliverable #3 (changes to DMARC base spec + DMARC Usage Guide
Component: interoperability Version:
Severity: - Keywords:
Cc:

Description

Pursuant to an email thread on the mailop list, we may want to consider how (or if) to do something about the ways that people have developed different processing handling for p=none vs. p!=none. Here's the example:

Does anyone know of any negative side effects of setting a DMARC policy: p=quarantine pct=0 ?

Is it equivalent to: p=none ?

I'm curious because I want to trigger Google Groups (and maybe others list forwarders?) to rewrite the From in a DMARC compliant fashion *prior* to changing the domain's DMARC policy... to avoid the "leap of faith" that p=none's monitoring mode was supposed to alleviate.

Change History (1)

comment:1 Changed 11 months ago by tim@…

I'm not sure I follow the "perverse" part in the description. "p=quarantine" + "pct=0" should not impact email in the same way that "p=none" does not.
BUT, since certain mailing lists do behavior differently if p!=none, it seems reasonable to do this as a check.

What to do? Maybe this gets documented in the usage guide as a thing people do.

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.