----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Levine" <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]
> Sent: Friday, May 22, 2015 4:17:33 PM
> Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC ATPS Interop Note
> 
> >> (3) I would really like to see some provision for reporting to mailbox
> >>     users when their mail is being discarded due to publication of
> >>     p=reject by their mailbox providers, especially in cases where a
> >>     Mediator is willing to put its reputation on the line by signing
> >>     the forwarded message. ...
> 
> >The email is bounced, not discarded. The mailbox user knows about it.
> >Unfortunately, bounces are so ugly that few people can successfully read
> >them.
> 
> Good point.  I would like to see some provision for reporting to mailbox
> users when their mail is effectively discarded due to p=quarantine.
> 
With p=quarantine commonly either the message is marked as [SPAM] in the 
subject or is delivered to the spam folder. The message is not discarded 
either, so the mailbox users knows about it because people tend to write back: 
"why your message was marked as spam?"

This is of course if the message is not spammy or contain a virus, or nasty 
stuff like that, where the anti-spam filter may discard the message.

At no point in the spec DMARC tells to "discard the message".

_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc

Reply via email to