On Dec 20, 2013, at 11:35 AM, John R Levine <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> The correct policy is p=none. > >> Considering that mailing lists are only about 10% of legitimate email >> traffic and if your humans do not rely on mailing lists, then you will be >> fine with DMARC and humans. > > Unfortunately, Franck is just wrong here. It's helpful when people can see and express ideas in more colors than black and white. Not all mailing lists break DMARC, so the percentage of email with potential deliverability issues is lower than that 10%. The mailing lists that break when a DMARC sender sends mail to them are lists which invalidate DKIM. They frequently do that by altering the message body (by appending a footer) and altering the subject (by inserting a prefix). I made my mailing lists "DMARC enabled" by disabling the footer and subject prefix. Other mailing list operators are choosing to reject email from DMARC domains with p=reject or quarantine. When it comes to DMARC and mailing lists, YMMV. > If you subscribe to a mailing list and publish a policy other than p=none, > you will screw up the list for other subscribers. ...you *may* screw up the list for others... That all depends on the list operator. > I expect that out of self-defense lists will have to add patches to reject > mail from anyone with DMARC policies. That's not a prophecy, that is already being done. (see mailman-reject and perl.org) Matt _______________________________________________ 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)
