DMARC p=reject means the same thing as ADSP discardable, the sender is so worried about phishing that it doesn't want you to deliver the mail if there's any doubt about its authenticity, even though that may mean losing real mail your users want.Did I miss this or am I interpreting something incorrectly? Has this aspect of DMARC actually changed since last summer? If so, great and I am sorry to all on list that I obviously missed that thread.
That's what it's always said, if neither SPF nor DKIM match the From: address, dump it. I've always interpreted this to mean that since it's OK to throw the mail away, the mail isn't very important, but other people seem to feel otherwise.
After all, can you think of a case where a uce sender/spammer would ever insist on having 100% of their messages dropped?
That's not the issue. The problem is people who send real mail and publish overly strict policies, then claim it's other people's responsibility when the mail screws up. This is not a new issue; back in about 2005 we had rants from people who published SPF -all and then insisted it was everyone else's job to rewrite their MTAs when legitimately forwarded mail got lost.
DMARC has the unusual added bit that a misconfigured sender can provoke SMTP rejections on the kinds of mail that mailing lists send, which causes the collateral damage we've been discussing.
R's, John
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ 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)
