[dmarc-ietf] Missing part in section 7.1

"J. Gomez" <jgomez@seryrich.com> Mon, 01 April 2013 20:01 UTC

Return-Path: <jgomez@seryrich.com>
X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47A7811E80E6 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Apr 2013 13:01:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zAvuTafqi9OD for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Apr 2013 13:01:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from eh.msi.es (eh.msi.es [213.27.239.123]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6265D11E80E8 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Mon, 1 Apr 2013 13:01:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from servidor3 (62.82.191.195) by exchange01.exchange.msi.es (192.168.223.3) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.213.0; Mon, 1 Apr 2013 22:01:16 +0200
Message-ID: <793049D3538C4764B7160CDED756D076@fgsr.local>
From: "J. Gomez" <jgomez@seryrich.com>
To: dmarc@ietf.org
Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2013 22:02:36 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.3790.4657
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.4913
Subject: [dmarc-ietf] Missing part in section 7.1
X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" <dmarc.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dmarc>, <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dmarc>
List-Post: <mailto:dmarc@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc>, <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2013 20:05:05 -0000

Hello.

In the current draft "draft-kucherawy-dmarc-base-00" ( http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kucherawy-dmarc-base-00 ), the second paragraph en section 7.1 does not make much sense.

It currently reads:

    For example, in the presence of "pct=50" in the DMARC policy record 
    for "example.com", half of the mesages with "example.com" in the 
    RFC5322.From field which fail the DMARC test would be subjected to 
    "reject" action, and the remainder subjected to "quarantine" action.

My guess is it should begin with:

    For example, in the presence of "pct=50" and "p=reject" in the DMARC policy record (...)


Regards,

J. Gomez