On 2016-10-13 20:06, Matt Simerson via dmarc-discuss wrote:

This thread has been hijacked by the lack of reading comprehension.
Nobody (in this thread) has complained of DMARC reports being too


The problem in this thread is an issue with some DMARC report senders
failing to parse the DMARC URIs properly, if that DMARC URI includes
size limits.

Right again. That's why I hesitated to re-post my findings on the IETF dmarc list.

For what it's worth, the largest report I ever got is ~2kB (compressed, 46kB uncompressed), but I run only a small system with a handful of users and lists. Would be interesting to hear what sizes larger sites receive (or send), but I doubt it gets into the region of ~1MB (compressed) - if the sender has a decent implementation (which OpenDMARC currently has not).

So again: Some report senders do not parse reporting URIs correct - please check your implementations... That was my point.

dmarc-discuss mailing list

NOTE: Participating in this list means you agree to the DMARC Note Well terms 

Reply via email to