On Thursday, April 24, 2014 8:20 PM, Hector Santos <[email protected]> wrote:
> Take a look at the 2006 DSAP I-D proposed author domain policy > protocol which provided tags to covered the complete 1st vs 3rd party > boundary conditions for DKIM signing practices: seems reasonable. but, believe me, there's no need to persuade me that we need 3rd party alignment support in DMARC. i don't rly care about how it's done... if it works fine and serves a purpose, great. however, it seems we will have a terrible time persuading some people here. they seems content with breaking email for the sake of "providing security". i always wanted to use this somewhere. seems like a perfect time and place: They who would give up an essential liberty for a temporary security deserve neither liberty nor security. ps. i do love how these big ESPs think that today's 90% of their email stream passing DMARC, comprising of mostly fb notifications ppl don't really care about or read, is enough of a reason to break rest of email stream, ppl actually care about, read and expect delivered without an issue. pps. i also love egotrips. it's almost unbelievable how big some egos here are... but, nothing new there. -- Vlatko Salaj aka goodone http://goodone.tk _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
