seems like a good idea On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 5:30 AM, Jacob Evans via dmarc-discuss < [email protected]> wrote:
> Hey All, > > Are we requesting that an auto generated/auto submitted header be included > in these reports? > > > > This will remove things like OOF Bounces and auto responders. (which will > just help patch misuse of the DMARC record itself as I would expect reports > should go to parsers, not users.) > > > > Just another ab/user, > > Jake > > ------------------------------ > > This message contains information that may be confidential and privileged. > Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive for the addressee), > you may not use, copy, print or disclose to anyone the message or any > information contained in the message. If you have received this e-mail in > error, please advise the sender by reply and delete the message. Thank you. > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Elizabeth Zwicky <[email protected]> > To: SpamAdmins <[email protected]> > Cc: > Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 04:03:10 +0000 > Subject: Auto Response: Report Domain: yahoo.com Submitter: Report-ID: > yahoo.com-1440561717@ > I am on vacation and will be back in the office on August 31st. > > Elizabeth Zwicky > > _______________________________________________ > 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)
