There is no documented consensus, and I would not document it that way anyhow.
I would prefer to say that Mailing lists, forwarders, third parties, which are more likely to be used by individuals more often than not break SPF and DKIM alignment, therefore DMARC. While DMARC is well suited for protecting transactional emails, one should be careful before enabling DMARC for domains used by individuals. As a side note, I have enabled DMARC for linkedin.com and I'm not suffering much from these problems. On the contrary it is helping. We did not want to split our domain linkedin.com to linkedin-inc.com or some other things, because of the "brand" it represents for our sales people. I know at least another party in this group that has same feeling re "brand" of the main domain. On 8/10/12 1:31 AM, "Roland Turner" <[email protected]> wrote: >All, > >I note that a consensus of sorts has formed in some places around the >non-use of quarantine and reject policies on domains which are used for >individual correspondence because of the loss of legitimate email that >will tend to result, however I've not been able to locate published text >on this (e.g. it's not mentioned in the draft, nor in the dmarc.org FAQ). > >Has this (or its contrary...) been documented as a consensus position >somewhere that I've missed? > >- Roland _______________________________________________ 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)
