google.com is p=quarantine
yahoo-inc.com is p=reject
microsoft.com is p=quarantine
paypal-inc.com is p=reject
You will find other resources at dmarc.org
As for the Gmail question, I think it is linked to the release of ARC.
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 12:06 PM, Payne, John via dmarc-discuss <
> > On Oct 22, 2015, at 3:43 PM, Payne, John <jpa...@akamai.com> wrote:
> >> On Oct 22, 2015, at 3:36 PM, Andrew Beverley via dmarc-discuss <
> firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> >> On Thu, 2015-10-22 at 10:19 -0700, Franck Martin via dmarc-discuss
> >> wrote:
> >>> The fun is moving to ARC
> >>> https://dmarc.org/2015/10/global-mailbox-providers-
> >> Sad to see that Gmail plan to move to p=reject
> > I’m hoping that it encourages the mailing list folk who have been
> reluctant to become DMARC safe to reconsider, whether thats ARC or wrapping.
> > As an enterprise hoping to go p=reject, this is potentially a big deal
> for me :)
> I’m not exactly in the loop, but besides this article almost a year ago, I
> haven’t seen anything else about gmail going p=reject… and it’s now 3
> months past the advertised date.
> Any word there?
> Somewhat related (to my earlier post) - are there any _enterprises_ on
> this list that have experience or are currently attempting to either go
> p=reject or enforce DMARC policies inbound?
> dmarc-discuss mailing list
> 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
NOTE: Participating in this list means you agree to the DMARC Note Well terms