Re: [dmarc-ietf] Ticket #111 - MX/A/AAAA test needs justification

[Todd Herr <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 11:13 PM Douglas Foster <
[e-mail]> wrote:

> This is about
> Section 3.8. Non-existent Domains
>
>    For DMARC purposes, a non-existent domain is a domain for which there
>    is an NXDOMAIN or NODATA response for A, AAAA, and MX records.  This
>    is a broader definition than that in [RFC8020].
>
> My argument is that that A/AAAA/MX has no useful relevance to determining whether the RFC5322.FROM address of a message should be evaluated based on SP or NP.  NP is described as testing "non-existent", rather than "possibly able to receive mail".   We need a test that evaluates whether the domain exists or not, and is maximally protected from false positives caused by host names and wildcards.
>
> If this group is convinced that A/AAAA/MX is meaningful for the distinction between SP and NP, I am asking someone to provide the justification and define the algorithm.  Right now I have seen neither.
>
>
>
For what it's worth, the text in question was copied directly from
draft-ietf-dmarc-psd
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dmarc-psd/>  (Section 2.7 of
that document, to be precise). As I understand it, draft-ietf-dmarc-psd
imposes some requirements on the text in DMARCbis, and so to support
satisfying those requirements, other bits of text were imported, too.
-- 

*Todd Herr* | Sr. Technical Program Manager
*e:* [e-mail]
*m:* 703.220.4153

This email and all data transmitted with it contains confidential and/or
proprietary information intended solely for the use of individual(s)
authorized to receive it. If you are not an intended and authorized
recipient you are hereby notified of any use, disclosure, copying or
distribution of the information included in this transmission is prohibited
and may be unlawful. Please immediately notify the sender by replying to
this email and then delete it from your system.