I alerted Steve Jones. He should get it fixed soon.... On the broader question, send aggregates and failure report from dedicated IPs, it is safer.
On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 9:00 AM, Al Iverson via dmarc-discuss < [email protected]> wrote: > Aha, that makes sense now. Thanks. > > On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 10:53 AM, Tim Draegen <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Jul 9, 2015, at 11:41 AM, Al Iverson via dmarc-discuss < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> I agree that it looks like a bum forwarder setup from what you've > >> posted. Forgive the dumb question -- why are you sending reports to > >> dmarc.org? > > > > > > No, this is just where dmarc.org is asking for reports to go. > > > > % dig _dmarc.dmarc.org txt > > "v=DMARC1\; p=none\; pct=100\; rua=mailto:[email protected]\; > ruf=mailto:[email protected]"; > > > > Indeed, it looks like a broken config on dmarc.org's end. They've been > redoing a lot of their stuff now that it is an official non-profit effort. > > > > -= Tim > > > > > > > > -- > Al Iverson | Minneapolis, MN | (312) 725-0130 > aliverson.com | spamresource.com | @aliverson > _______________________________________________ > 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) >
_______________________________________________ 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)
