>that might be done to get anybody involved in DMARC to actually undo the >damage at the core (e.g., i.e., de-spec p=reject, or at least not use >it).
There's nothing wrong with p=reject when it's used reasonably. There's a p=reject for paypal.com which is fine, since all paypal.com mail comes from Paypal, and they understand DMARC well enough to tell their staff to use a different domain for their individual mail. The problem here is how to create a DO NOT AIM GUN AT FOOT warning that people will read and understand and actually follow. It is also my impression that what's going on at Yahoo is far more complicated than a simple failure to understand what DMARC does, since I know staff people there who understand it as well as anyone. R's, John _______________________________________________ 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)
