On April 15, 2023 12:26:16 PM UTC, Laura Atkins <la...@wordtothewise.com> wrote:
>On Apr 15, 2023, at 4:25 AM, Scott Kitterman <skl...@kitterman.com> wrote:
...
>> Or [person] gets a Gmail account for his IETF work and doesn't bother
>> tilting at
>> windmills.
>
>That solution only works until gmail publishes p=reject. At one point they
>said they were going to do that.
>
>It seems to me that there is zero harm in actively documenting the problems
>with DMARC and making interoperability recommendations about who should and
>should not be publishing restrictive policies.
I agree on documenting the issues with DMARC and making recommendations to
improve interoperability. There are issues and they're significant, but we
shouldn't catastrophize them either.
To your other point, if that happens then people will move to another provider
if it affects them negatively. If free email providers that don't have
p=reject get hard to find, then that probably creates a demand signal and some
entrepreneur will fill the void.
Scott K
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
dmarc@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
