[dmarc-discuss] How to handle temporary dns failure?
Michiel van de Vis
m.vandevis at acervus.nl
Mon Jun 11 23:29:46 PDT 2012
(Please ignore my remark about more information in the forensic reports
since I've just discovered the additional headers)
2012/6/12 Michiel van de Vis <m.vandevis at acervus.nl>
> Hello Junping,
> Perhaps temporary errors should be handled differently apart from hard
> Or the receiver shouldn't permanently block the sender based on a (temp)
> I don't see how different DMARC/DKIM domains would help.
> Both calls have the possibility off receiving a 'TEMP error'.
> Furthermore it would be nice to specify a reason for the SPF/DKIM fails in
> the forensic report, this would help debugging on the sender's side.
> At this moment you only specify the identifiers which did pass the checks,
> not the ones which failed.
> I'm curious how others think about this.
> 2012/6/12 pandalove <pandalove at 126.com>
>> Hi folks,
>> These are mails who are DKIM aligned and SPF not aligned naturally(such
>> as newsletters ESPs using envelope sender domain different from header from
>> domain, providing no SPF aligned identifier), if the mail receiver gets
>> temporary dns failure when requesting DKIM selector, this email will fail
>> DKIM verification and provide no DKIM aligned identifier.
>> In this case, such emails will fail the whole DAMRC mechanisms. If their
>> "p=" tag is not "none", these emails will be rejected or quarantined. At
>> least, a forensic report will be sent.
>> Considering people may use different DNS domains for DKIM selector and
>> DMARC record, so the mail receiver can query DMARC record successfully, but
>> DKIM selector DNS request can solely fail .
>> That is, once their DKIM selector DNS temporarily failed, their mails ca!
>> n not be delivered normally due to DMARC failure.
>> Anyone want to share his opinion about such a situation?
>> dmarc-discuss mailing list
>> dmarc-discuss at dmarc.org
>> NOTE: Participating in this list means you agree to the DMARC Note Well
>> terms (http://www.dmarc.org/note_well.html)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the dmarc-discuss