Given this query:
nicholas@mordor:~$
nicholas@mordor:~$ dig TXT _dmarc.cisco.com
; <<>> DiG 9.16.8-Ubuntu <<>> TXT _dmarc.cisco.com
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 3976
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1
;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION:
; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 65494
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;_dmarc.cisco.com. IN TXT
;; ANSWER SECTION:
_dmarc.cisco.com. 1238 IN TXT "v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; pct=0; fo=1; ri=3600; rua=mailto:[email protected],mailto:[email protected]; ruf=mailto:[email protected],mailto:[email protected];"
;; Query time: 0 msec
;; SERVER: 127.0.0.53#53(127.0.0.53)
;; WHEN: Fri Sep 10 19:21:51 PDT 2021
;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 231
nicholas@mordor:~$
nicholas@mordor:~$ uname -a
Linux mordor 5.11.0-34-generic #36-Ubuntu SMP Thu Aug 26 19:22:09 UTC 2021 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
nicholas@mordor:~$
How is it known whether the DMARC
record exists or not for Cisco?
Even better, what would be a counter-example where there's not a DMARC
record? How would such a query result differ?
If the Answer
section lacks such an entry as:
;; ANSWER SECTION:
_dmarc.cisco.com. 1238 IN TXT "v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; pct=0; fo=1; ri=3600; rua=mailto:[email protected],mailto:[email protected]; ruf=mailto:[email protected],mailto:[email protected];"
then there's a missing DMARC
record?