> Thus, I am reminding all of you of your obligation to keep > this discussion professional, on topic, respectful, and friendly.
i do not see how this is at all possible, when a pretty developed solution is ridiculed as a Klingon-speech, not by only few of participants, but the very same administrator of this mailing list. let's call it irony. for what it's worth, both Hector's and Douglas' solutions to, more than obvious DMARC problem, work fine for solving issues with case-scenarios i have in my environment. thanks for working on those, guys. yes, you do need much wider support, if this is gonna take off, and i hope some of the more influential speakers here will provide it [looking to ML developers]. in the end, imo, DMARC policy model, if not bug-fixed, which seems all too much probable as whole DMARC establishment doesn't care, will justdie off and become irrelevant, fading with smoke of false-positivesit generates, as no sane service will respect "reject" policy whose legitimacy is fluid, saving themselves from wrath of both end-senders and end-receivers. and world will choose to keep email functional as it is, instead of breaking it with some ill-developed rigid standard forinternet of parallel universe. at least we will have DMARC reporting... and possibly some ground for building a better protocol in the future. cause, this one is simply not working properly. since as much is obvious to a small guy like myself, it should be obvious to any speaker of a Federation of Planets specie that doesn't speak Klingon very well. -- Vlatko Salaj aka goodone http://goodone.tk _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
