Skip to content
Authentication

DMARC alignment: relaxed vs strict, adkim and aspf

Alignment is DMARC's core concept: the authenticated domain must match the From: domain. How relaxed and strict modes work and which mechanism carries the pass.

Alignment is the single most important idea in DMARC. It answers a straightforward question: does the domain that passed authentication match the domain in the From: header? SPF and DKIM are ID checks: they verify a sender's eligibility to use a domain. Alignment is the step that confirms the person showing the ID is the same person named on the meeting invitation. Without that step, the ID check means nothing to the recipient.

One aligned pass is enough

DMARC passes if at least one of the following is true: SPF passes and the SPF-authenticated domain aligns with the From: domain, or DKIM passes and the DKIM-signing domain (the d= tag) aligns with the From: domain. Only one needs to work. If DKIM aligns but SPF does not, DMARC still passes, and this asymmetry is what makes DMARC deployable in the real world, where ESP bounce domains routinely break SPF alignment while custom DKIM signing preserves DKIM alignment.

The SPF side of this rule, envelope sender versus From: header, custom bounce domains, and why forwarding kills aligned SPF, has its own detailed entry: SPF alignment. The short version: an SPF pass for your ESP's domain contributes nothing to your DMARC, and the fix is a custom Return-Path on your own subdomain.

Relaxed vs strict alignment

Alignment has two modes, and the difference matters when working with subdomains. Relaxed alignment (the default) requires the authenticated domain and the From: domain to share the same organizational (root) domain: mail.example.com aligns with example.com. This is the sensible default for most configurations. Strict alignment requires an exact match: mail.example.com does not align with example.com.

Alignment modes compared

FeatureRelaxed (r, default)Strict (s)
mail.example.com vs example.comalignednot aligned
example.com vs example.comalignedaligned
example.org vs example.comnot alignednot aligned
Typical useStandard setups with sending subdomainsSubdomains as separate trust boundaries

Strict mode is useful when subdomains act as separate trust boundaries, for example when different teams or services own different subdomains and should not be able to authenticate on each other's behalf. For everyone else, relaxed mode matches how production email actually works: bounce subdomains, ESP signing subdomains, and regional sending domains all align with the organizational domain without extra configuration.

The adkim and aspf tags

The adkim (DKIM alignment) and aspf (SPF alignment) tags in the DMARC record control the mode per mechanism. Both default to r (relaxed), both accept s (strict), and they are set independently: a record can demand strict DKIM alignment while leaving SPF relaxed. Most records never set either tag and simply inherit the relaxed defaults, which is the right call unless a specific trust-boundary requirement says otherwise.

Alignment tags in a recordRFC 1035
TXT / SPFMX / PTRA / AAAACNAME / NS / other
; Defaults (relaxed both): the tags can simply be omitted
"v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:reports@example.com"
; Strict DKIM alignment, relaxed SPF
"v=DMARC1; p=reject; adkim=s; aspf=r; rua=mailto:reports@example.com"

Diagnosing alignment in practice

Alignment failures on known senders are the most common issue during a DMARC rollout, and they show up plainly in aggregate reports: an ESP's source IP passes SPF for the ESP's domain and passes DKIM for the ESP's domain, and neither aligns with yours. The fix is almost always configuring custom DKIM signing through the ESP's dashboard, so the DKIM d= domain matches the From: domain. In a delivered message's Authentication-Results header, dmarc=pass confirms alignment succeeded; dkim=pass with someone else's domain in header.i alongside dmarc=fail is the signature of the unaligned-vendor problem.

Frequently asked questions

Do both SPF and DKIM need to align for DMARC to pass?
No, one aligned pass is sufficient. Best practice is to configure both anyway: DKIM survives forwarding while SPF does not, and SPF covers DKIM's failure modes like broken signatures after key rotation mistakes.
Should I use strict alignment for better security?
Usually not. Strict mode breaks legitimate subdomain patterns (bounce domains, ESP signing domains) while adding little protection, since relaxed mode already requires the same organizational domain. Reserve strict for genuine trust-boundary separation between subdomains.
How is the organizational domain determined for relaxed matching?
Historically via the Public Suffix List; under DMARCbis receivers use a DNS tree walk instead. For ordinary corporate domains both methods agree, so the change is invisible unless you operate unusual domain structures.
Can alignment pass while SPF and DKIM both technically pass for other domains?
No, that is exactly the case alignment exists to catch. Passing SPF or DKIM for an unrelated domain contributes nothing; DMARC requires the pass to belong to a domain matching the From: header.

Key takeaways

  • Alignment connects an SPF or DKIM pass to the From: domain the recipient actually sees
  • One aligned mechanism is enough for DMARC to pass; DKIM is usually the resilient one
  • Relaxed mode (default) matches on the organizational domain; strict demands an exact match
  • adkim and aspf control the modes independently and rarely need changing from their relaxed defaults
  • Unaligned vendor mail is fixed with custom DKIM signing and custom bounce domains, verified in aggregate reports
DMARC alignment explained: relaxed vs strict mode | Inbox Theory