[dmarc-discuss] Fwd: [dmarc-ietf] draft-kucherawy-dmarc-base-04 issue
johnl at taugh.com
Mon Sep 1 09:50:04 PDT 2014
>> >>I don't understand what fo=1 is supposed to mean. ..
>> The ambiguity for me is between SPF or DKIM failed and no SPF or DKIM
>> at all. As I read it, it probably means failure, but maybe it means
>> something else.
>I think for DMARC, SPF/DKIM failed/none are the same thing.
For DMARC pass/fail, sure. For DMARC reporting, I dunno.
Practically speaking, I would not find reports confirming that I had
no SPF at all very interesting. Remember that this is for messages
that passed DMARC anyway, so they must have had signatures. Ditto if
they say there was no signature, but the SPF was OK.
More information about the dmarc-discuss