RFC 7489, "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Conformance (DMARC)", March 2015

Note: This RFC has been updated by RFC 8553, RFC 8616

Errata ID: 7835
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Giuseppe Trotta
Date Reported: 2024-03-04
Held for Document Update by: Eliot Lear
Date Held: 2024-03-11

Section 6.6.3 says:

   2.  Records that do not start with a "v=" tag that identifies the
       current version of DMARC are discarded.

   3.  If the set is now empty, the Mail Receiver MUST query the DNS for
       a DMARC TXT record at the DNS domain matching the Organizational
       Domain in place of the RFC5322.From domain in the message (if
       different).  This record can contain policy to be asserted for
       subdomains of the Organizational Domain.  A possibly empty set of
       records is returned.

   4.  Records that do not start with a "v=" tag that identifies the
       current version of DMARC are discarded.

It should say:

   2.  Records that do not start with a "v=" tag that identifies the
       current version of DMARC are discarded.

   3.  If the set is now empty, the Mail Receiver MUST query the DNS for
       a DMARC TXT record at the DNS domain matching the Organizational
       Domain in place of the RFC5322.From domain in the message (if
       different).  This record can contain policy to be asserted for
       subdomains of the Organizational Domain.  A possibly empty set of
       records is returned.

Notes:

The intent of the original text is that indeed step 2 should be repeated as follows:
(1) Go get a set of things.
(2) Filter them.
(3) If the set is now empty, go get a set of things from a different location.
(4) Filter them.

At the time of this writing, draft-ietf-dmarc-dmarcbis is being developed, and so that text may clarify this point. As such we will hold this erratum for update.

Report New Errata