On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 2:19 PM, Anne Bennett <[email protected]> wrote:
> But yes, the ideal situation is where we sort every message > correctly and unambiguously. Meanwhile... > > Even if we grant that "p=quarantine is a problem WE cause", > the fact is that until we have a *good* solution for mailing > lists, most of us don't dare publish p=reject, which leaves us > with p=none, or no DMARC records at all. Which means that (a) > many of us cannot benefit from using DMARC under the current > circumstances, and (b) many sites don't have the resources to > implement it yet, but we still have to deal with their mail. > I'm not willing to throw the baby out with the bathwater. +1. To be a bit flippant about it: Now that we have everyone's attention, possibly moreso than ever before, maybe it's possible to come up with a compromise that all corners of the email ecosystem can accept. But that doesn't mean we need to settle for creating schisms in that ecosystem. Entrenching is not the answer. -MSK
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
