Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC2 & SPF Dependency Removal

[Jesse Thompson <[e-mail]>]

On Sat, Jun 10, 2023, at 12:50 AM, Barry Leiba wrote:
> Are there working group participants who can do this sort of
> evaluation, not just giving numbers but also analyzing why DKIM
> failures happened when they should not have?

As primarily an outbound ESP, we don't have access to relevant inbound logs, nor DMARC reports for customer domains, so our awareness of this issue is dependent on being told.

That said, at MAAWG we were made aware of an edge case which is resulting in DKIM failures. Presumably, unknown bugs like this are inflating the numbers to support the "pro keeping SPF in DMARC" argument.

I typically advise customers that DKIM (CNAMEs with managed rotation) is enough. But that's speaking as a sender that supports DKIM. I suppose that some senders still aren't willing to implement DKIM today.

Jesse