Because I didn't implement DMARC on the receiver side.  If I had, I wouldn't 
get your mail.

What point are you trying to make?  I'm completely missing it.

Scott K

On Friday, August 10, 2012 05:59:48 PM Franck Martin wrote:
> Because I'm trying to make a point too ;) And you do receive my emails, so
> where is the problem :P
> 
> On 8/10/12 10:45 AM, "Scott Kitterman" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >And yet you seem to want people on this list to get your mail, so I'm
> >confused?
> >
> >Scott K
> >
> >On Friday, August 10, 2012 05:29:57 PM Franck Martin wrote:
> >> 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.
_______________________________________________
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)

Reply via email to