On 12/14/2017 06:23 PM, Steve Atkins wrote:
If you want to argue more loudly that you *do* understand what it means you could publish a matching DMARC record with p=discard. Doing that would tell recipient ISPs that either you've actually done appropriate analysis of your mail stream, you understand that rejecting mail with SPF -all failures will cause legitimate mail to be lost and have made an informed decision. Or, at least, that you're saying that's the case. They're more likely to trust your assertion in that case - though it's still just a signal that they will combine with others before deciding whether or not to deliver an email.
So why do people believe me more now when I publish p=reject for DMARC than they did when I published -all for SPF?
What happens when a lot of people shoot themselves in the foot and receivers start giving DMARC less and less credence. Will we then need something new to convince them that I really do mean what I publish?
I view that as a self perpetuating problem. I'd rather stop that cycle and take a stand now.
IMHO there is too much coddling in the world. -- Grant. . . . unix || die
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
