On 08/10/2012 12:05, Tim Draegen wrote:
On Aug 10, 2012, at 2:58 PM, "Menotti Minutillo, Jr."
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I think any references to ruf in FAQs should have a quick warning,
e.g. "Note that specifying an ruf tag will ask receiving ISPs to
report authentication failures to the address specified in your
domain's ruf tag as they happen. This often causes an influx of
reports and should only be enabled if you've prepared some
aggregation function."
Understood. Thanks for the pointers & suggestion. I'll open a ticket
internally to make sure the published FAQs and the DMARC.ORG
<http://DMARC.ORG> site contains quick warnings where appropriate.
I thought we had some warnings about that, but a review never hurts.
Clearly it could be... uhm, clearer. :)
An additional point would be to suggest the use of a different
address/mailbox to receive forensic vs. aggregate reports. Even if the
mailbox for the forensic reports fills up you may still be able to
receive aggregate reports, and it reinforces the point that they are two
different things.
--S.
_______________________________________________
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)
