Alessandro Vesely wrote in
<34f44d43-09f1-4dbb-9b9e-11391a022...@tana.it>:
|On 15/11/2024 20:13, Dave Crocker wrote:
|> On 11/15/2024 10:55 AM, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
|>> On 13/11/2024 21:14, Dave Crocker wrote:
|>>> While 'indirect' has well-established context in many email technical
|>>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In message <20241116204935.dCb0mQcG@steffen%sdaoden.eu>, Steffen
Nurpmeso writes
>Having said that, if it is really acceptable to include the entire
>history of changes in that "stack" that email headers form (hihi:
>yes please, i find it absurd that
Richard Clayton wrote in
:
|-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
|Hash: SHA1
|
|In message <20241116204935.dCb0mQcG@steffen%sdaoden.eu>, Steffen
|Nurpmeso writes
|
|>Having said that, if it is really acceptable to include the entire
|>history of changes in that "stack" that email headers fo
It appears that Murray S. Kucherawy said:
>A small operator or individual with a good idea that lacks the resources to
>test at scale shouldn't be excluded unnecessarily. Are the large operators
>reasonably willing to test promising ideas even if they're not their own?
Based on private discussi
On 11/16/2024 2:39 AM, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
DMARC's alignment requirement is an attempt at capturing the concept
of legitimacy.
It is an attempt at defining and constraining a very specific kind of
limited legitimacy.
Yup, it is successful as it catches a good deal of cases, direct mail
On 15/11/2024 20:13, Dave Crocker wrote:
On 11/15/2024 10:55 AM, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
On 13/11/2024 21:14, Dave Crocker wrote:
While 'indirect' has well-established context in many email technical
circles, I believe it does not have clear, consistent, and precise
meaning. So it needs to b
