On 3/29/13 5:47 PM, "John Levine" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>5) Set p=reject without taking this advice into account and then be >>shocked and horrified that mail >>you wanted to deliver is rejected. > >It's worse than that. If you set p=reject and send mail to lists, you >will hurt innocent bystanders. > >If recipients implement DMARC in good faith and do what it says, and >your mail starts arriving from lists, the recipients will reject that >mail, which the lists will see as delivery failures. With enough >delivery failures, those recipients will be bounced off the list due >to your malfeasance. > >This exact thing happened on some IETF lists when DKIM was young and >some MTA operator overimplemented ADSP and treated "discard" as >reject. > >The right thing to do is not to send mail to lists from domains that >have a policy other than p=none. I agree with your outline of the >reasonable options. Are you telling us that mailing lists do not make the difference between a hard bounce or a soft bounce? This seems like a bug to me. Now, more factual, I read this doc (http://www.esosoft.com/support/mailinglist/mailman/bounce.html) a few weeks ago, and mailman seems to consider as a hard bounce, any bounce it does not recognize, this seems to me poor design. _______________________________________________ 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)
