[dmarc-ietf] DMARCbis and M3AAWG Email Auth BCP (was re: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows)

[Todd Herr <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 9:51 AM Mark Alley <mark.alley=
[e-mail]> wrote:

> I know that M3 is totally separate from this group, but this is more-so a
> question for Todd H- does this mean that the M3AAWG authentication best
> practices recommendation will also change based on this if this is the
> intended usage going forwards with DMARCbis?
>
> Quote from the existing document
> <https://www.m3aawg.org/sites/default/files/m3aawg-email-authentication-recommended-best-practices-09-2020.pdf>
> -
>
>    - "DMARC Policy statements should be “p=reject” where possible,
>
>
>    - “p=quarantine” otherwise.
>    -  “p=none”, “sp=none”, and pct<100 should only be viewed as
>       transitional states, with the goal of removing them as quickly as possible.
>       "
>
> Maybe. There's wiggle room there with the "should be ... where possible",
but you're right that this question is probably off-topic for this working
group.

-- 

*Todd Herr * | Technical Director, Standards and Ecosystem
*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.