DMARC does not change the way your email is handled, if it is crap, it will still go in the spam folder.
What DMARC does, is reject some type of phishing emails (people trying to pass for you). Some mail servers that forward emails break DKIM and SPF therefore DMARC, but they are known to do that, so the mail receiver may decide not to apply the DMARC policy. From: Gregorius Gede Wiranarada <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Sunday, December 9, 2012 6:24 PM To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: [dmarc-discuss] Fwd: only spf, no dkim i'm the sender. i'm hoping that dmarc can help me convince receivers not to put emails coming from my mail server into their spam folder. if i implement dkim, would it guarantee that receivers won't treat my emails as spam? and by the way, is forwading bad? i see some forwarding in my dmarc report from google and yahoo. what does forwarding here mean? spoof email ? does the term "forwarding" in the report means that an email sent from my mail server to someone at domain B was then forwarded to someone else at domain C ? regards, gregor On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Paul Midgen <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: gregor, assuming you're on the sending side of the equation: so long as your use of spf conforms with dmarc's expectations it will suffice. however, you will not benefit from dkim's assistance in mitigating known common spf failures, such as forwarding. so you really want to be certain you understand what that means for your mailstream before you publish a quarantine or reject policy. conforming use of spf, in the case of dmarc's default alignment model, means that your envelope and body-from addresses share the same organizational domain. for example, a passing spf result for a message with the following identities would pass dmarc validation: envelope-sender (5321.MailFrom): [email protected]<http://yourdomain.org> body-from (5322.From): [email protected]<http://yourdomain.org> if you're a receiver, unless you're being menaced by anti-dkim space monsters, you should be validating dkim inbound. it's right up there with helping old ladies cross the street. though i'm sure one of those statements will prove unpopular with someone, doing so is goodness nonetheless. hth, p From: Gregorius Gede Wiranarada <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Sunday, December 2, 2012 7:47 PM To: <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: [dmarc-discuss] only spf, no dkim dear all, if i only use SPF and no DKIM, would DMARC works for me? thx regards, gregor _______________________________________________ dmarc-discuss mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[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)
