On 02/08/2017 10:45 PM, John Levine via dmarc-discuss wrote (after Jim
Popovitch wrote):
They have an obligation, to everyone, to get it right, irregardless of
sender preferences.
I have to say that it's amusing that someone apparently believes that
every DMARC installation in the world should rewrite their code,
breaking backward compatibility, merely because he can't be bothered
to learn how to use the analysis tools that everyone else uses.
I would hazard a guess that he hasn't grasped that this is the corollary
of the obligation that he is asserting that senders of reports have to
him. More importantly, it would appear that - despite my coming at the
question from multiple directions in the hope of finding common ground
on this point - he really does believe that random third parties have
this obligation to him. This being the case, agreement on how to address
his initial concern would appear to be impossible to achieve.
But perhaps this discussion can be over now.
I'm being politely prodded off-list along these lines and, sadly, am
inclined to agree. Apologies to all for not disengaging sooner.
- Roland
_______________________________________________
dmarc-discuss mailing list
dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org
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)
