On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 7:31 AM, Steve Atkins <st...@blighty.com> wrote: > If your domain publishes p=reject it should not have any users > that participate in mailing lists.
Like many, I was pretty unhappy (and busy) with the unilateral changes made by Yahoo and AOL. But this understandable stance may change. Neither of these domains is known for being heavily saturated with geeks. If Gmail started using p=reject, that might shake the tree a little more. But other than providing more warning, what would have been a better way to start eliminating forged senders? Everything I've read indicates that both Yahoo and AOL did this with eyes wide open. Assuming that eliminating forged senders is the end goal, maybe forcing the issue was the only way to move forward? What other theory about their motivation makes sense? Royce
