Yahoo! will interpret a p=reject policy as meaning that we may at our option
reject any mail that fails DMARC.
We will NOT promise to correctly identify mailing lists and save your mail; nor
will we promise to reject all the mail.
I note that we enjoy rejecting mail, but not at the expense of making users
very sad. We do, in fact, use DMARC to
reject mail.
Once again, I strongly recommend using p=reject only for transactional mail. If
you use it for domains containing
humans, some of their mail will be rejected. If they are humans who you can
force to live with this, more power to you,
go for it. Save rates will be better for p=quarantine (then again, there is no
spam so spammy that no user will save it,
so p=quarantine is also notably less protective.)
Elizabeth
On Jun 25, 2012, at 7:21 PM, Michael Adkins wrote:
> I'd say theory 1, with the caveat that only the major providers have been
> enforcing our policy for a significant length of time either via DMARC or
> our intermediary's private channel.
>
>
> On 6/25/12 6:23 PM, "John R Levine" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> We have several users subscribed to things like google
>>> groups and yahoo groups.
>>
>> Hmmn.
>>
>> Theory 1: everyone knows who Google and Yahoo groups are, and whitelist
>> their mail
>>
>> Theory B: nobody actually takes p=reject seriously
>>
>> R's,
>> John
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dmarc-discuss mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.dmarc.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc-discuss
>
> NOTE: Participating in this list means you agree to the DMARC Note Well terms
> (http://www.dmarc.org/note_well.html)
_______________________________________________
dmarc-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.dmarc.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc-discuss
NOTE: Participating in this list means you agree to the DMARC Note Well terms
(http://www.dmarc.org/note_well.html)
