>> It is a problem when receiving servers use DMARC existence and >> pass/fail to increase/decrease deliverability rates. - And when >> Yahoo/AOL pretty much block everything you send - even with a 98 >> sender score, SPF, DKIM, and clean opt-in lists.
>Are they rejecting on DMARC failure because you're publishing p=reject? NO p=none >If so, they're doing exactly what you're asking them to do. If you don't want >them to reject your mail, why are you telling them to do that? >I realize that getting large organizations to act coherently is close to >impossible, but that doesn't mean the rest of the world has to work around >their failures. If it's not important to them to make their DMARC records >match their actual practices, it's not important to >anyone else, either. >> Going back to the beginning, DMARC breaks how SMTP worked. The Sender >> address serves a purpose. This is the address bounces should return to. >> DMARC took a steamroller to the Sender address and it didn't have to. >Yes, we all know DMARC's problems. I complained as loudly as anyone when AOL >and Yahoo abused it to push the costs of their security failures onto everyone >else. >But the people who designed it knew a lot about the way that mail works, they >they did what they did. Prior attempts to key on sender were a complete >failure. I hope you have read RFC 4407. You don't have to like the way that >DMARC ignores Sender, but it's not an >accident, and telling people they are >stupid is not going to change any minds. I don't remember saying anything like that John. I doubt anyone in this thread has a low IQ. In fact, I am very thankful for this discussion and everyone who is taking part. I am learning things from each of you outside of my general scope of operation. I DO think this is an unnecessary problem that CAN be fixed/improved in one of two fairly straightforward manners through DNS (behavior switch or list authorized alternate domains). And I can't see anything but upside in doing so; nobody has demonstrated a downside anyways. Yet I have no idea how such decisions are made or the part that anyone plays here. I will review RFC 4407. Thanks. >Regards, >John Levine, [email protected], Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY Please >consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly Best, Charles Gregory _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
