>> There's no muddling going on.  dmarc.fail is a real domain that should have
>> an excellent reputation since it sends no phish.
>
>I think Franck is right. It is muddying the waters by introducing a
>wholly other domain that has nothing to do with the list or the
>subscriber. Not seeing why anybody would recommend that as a best
>practice.

I suppose I could make the rewrite domains into subdomains of the ones
the lists use, for the six different domains I use for lists, but if
the lists are well behaved the mail in the rewrite domain is clean, so
it has a good reputation anyway.  It's hard to see how that would make
much difference to spam filters.

If you're going to deal with phish, you can't mechanically recognize
lookalike domains, since people are way better at seeing relationships
between names than computers are, so you need to whack poor reputation
domains in general.

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)

Reply via email to