On 9/20/12 7:37 PM, "John Levine" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>Is it better to do this, or to hold off on enforcement until the senders
>>can also get reports from us? Since not all senders request reporting, I
>>assume it's better to enforce than to do nothing at all.
>
>I would much, much rather have reports without enforcement rather than
>the other way around. Enforcement invariably produces surprises, and
>without the reports it's pretty much impossible to figure out what
>happened.
Good point. Enforcing without reporting would be disruptive for those
senders. And it seems pointless to enforce only those senders who don't
also request reporting.
J
John Sweet
Principle Software Engineer
Mimecast North America Inc
500 Howard Street, Suite 405 San Francisco, CA 94105
mobile 00 1 415 425 3743
tel: +1 800 660 1194
web www.mimecast.com
The information contained in this communication from [email protected] is
confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for use by
[email protected] and others authorized to receive it. If you are not
[email protected] you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying,
distribution or taking action in reliance of the contents of this information
is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
Mimecast Services Ltd. is a company registered in England and Wales with the
company number 04901524 VAT No. GB 123 4197 34 Email Address: [email protected]
This email message has been scanned for viruses by Mimecast.
Mimecast delivers a complete managed email solution from a single web based
platform.
For more information please visit http://www.mimecast.com
_______________________________________________
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)
