Quoting Bernard Rosset via Dng (dng@lists.dyne.org): > It seems we're drifting away from the main subject. > Count me in!
Roger that! Subject header tweaked. > ? > If your emails are being refused by others, including major email > hosters, I would kindly suggest you check you got at least correct > SPF + DKIM entries. You can throw DMARC into the mix if you wish so, > too. Umm... As I already mentioned upthread, my domains' e-mail continue to have very high deliverability. Those domains feature strongly asserted SPF RRs in their auth DNS. However, by carefully considered local policy, I decline to also implement DKIM/DMARC, considering those extensions to have been botched in design and implementation by Yahoo, Inc. (DKIM seems to be the keystone problem, there, particularly its hapless hostility to MLM-mediated forwarding.) Empirically, I so far perceive no measurable loss of host reputation from declining to implement DKIM/DMARC. I _do_ publish, in each of my domains' DNS, deliberately non-compliant DMARC RRs, just to make my stance quite clear, e.g.: :r! dig -t txt _dmarc.linuxmafia.com @ns1.linuxmafia.com +short "DMARC: tragically misdesigned since 2012. Check our SPF RR, instead." > It's saddening to assess how little is known by the general public > (including people who actually work on technical matters in IT) about > key technologies, like DNS (the mother/father of all) or email. True datum: When I began hosting my own SMTP smarthosts, I was still a staff accountant (UK: chartered accountant) for a living, not a sysadmin. Fortunately, nobody told me I couldn't do it, so it worked. _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng