On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 15:23:08 PDT, "Murray S. Kucherawy" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 1:21 PM, J. Gomez <[email protected]> wrote: > > > If DMARC is going to increase support costs for small email operators, I > > may as well migrate all my clients to Google Apps or Office 365 and be done > > with costly email. > > > > That is why, in my view, DMARC's p=reject has to either be reliable to be > > relied on, or be suppressed from DMARC's formal specification if it is > > going to mainly be equal to p=do-whatever. > > Can anyone point to a single instance of a sender-receiver policy protocol > that was "reliable" by this definition, enough that receivers would blindly > agree to do whatever the sender asked/suggested/demanded? > > I can't think of any. Some, many, or most of them were supposed to be, but > it has never turned out that way. I don't know why DMARC is being held to > a different standard. Isn't DMARC holding itself to a different standard? What's a receiver supposed to do with unaligned mail whose "From:" domain specifies p=reject? Clearly, the domain owner is explicitly asking that the message be rejected. If DMARC intends that this be merely one of many factors to consider, then doesn't it boil down to nothing more than p=do-whatever? Yes, I know that receivers can and will do as they please, but some receivers would be pleased as punch to cooperate in a scheme that gave solid proof of a message's illegitimacy in every case where it was asserted. The problem is that publishing p=reject effectively asserts that almost all submissions to mailing lists by users in the domain are illegitimate, and I'm afraid the real world doesn't believe that to be the case. That's not to say that DMARC should change anything about itself. It's just recognition that making it a great success will depend on someone finding a way to let mailing lists collaborate with DMARC without alienating their list users, owners or managers. I'd love to announce that I've found the way, but I'm as befuddled as anyone else. MJA _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
