Hi, On 2021-07-10 3:25 a.m., Reco wrote: > Hi. > > On Sat, Jul 10, 2021 at 12:20:24AM -0400, Polyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside > wrote: >> I receive the following regarding messages sent on the mailing list... > > A usual dmarc report, and you receive that because your domain has DMARC > policy set that way - it's a TXT record _dmarc.polynamaude.com. > > BTW - why have you set "p=none" there? > I'll go read in my note but from memory I don't remember what does p=none do. > >> Someone understand something ? > > Sure. Every time you send the e-mail to the list, multiple MTAs resent > your e-mail to whom they deem appropriate. > The idea of DMARC is to show you, the domain owner, how the world > perceives e-mails sent on your behalf (or not, considering the spammers). > > This particular dmarc report comes from the FastMail, and it shows, > along with the other things: > > 1) That your e-mails go through bendel.debian.org, the MTA behind this > very list (and other Debian lists). There are others MTA there, but > bendel.d.o is the most important. > > 2) The fact that your DKIM policy is unnecessary strict, because your > mails to this list routinely fail to verify DKIM. > What you mean unnecessary strict ? > 3) The fact that your SPF policy is failing, probably because your SPF > does not designate bendel.d.o as a permitted sender on your behalf. > Oh, I could simply add bendel.d.o and it would work ? > Also, consider installing dmarc-cat package, it really useful in > interpreting those DMARC reports, as it shows DMARC report as a > human-readable text, not XML. > I'll install dmarc-cat and see what it gives out. Probably I'm missing some stuff. > Reco >
-- Polyna-Maude R.-Summerside -Be smart, Be wise, Support opensource development
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
