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

[Hector Santos <[e-mail]>]

> On Jun 9, 2023, at 4:41 AM, Barry Leiba <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
> 
> Repeating this one point as chair, to make it absolutely clear:
> 
> The proposal we're discussing is removing SPF authentication from
> DMARC evaluation *only*.  We will *not* consider what should happen to
> SPF outside of DMARC, and any discussion of that is *out of scope* for
> this working group under its current charter.
> 
> Barry, as chair

For the record,  from a long time SMTP implementer standpoint, DMARC would be ignored, dropped, turned off, etc first before any consideration to stop SPF support.   As a Transporter, SPF works. As an Administrator - ADSP, I mean “Supper ADSP” aka DMARC has been horrible.  I, and most people, could easily deprecate Wildcat! DMARC with no harm and fact, less harm because the false positives will disappear.  My product add-on for wcSMTP, wcDMARC, never did honor the p=reject|quarantine. It was left for filters and no one hard any confidence to make it work.

SPF on the other hand, I don’t see dropped in the name of DMARC.  So if it’s about sparate, but not abandon, that I can support - because it is already separate.  SPF preempts DMARC or any Payload protocol..

Thanks