Steve Atkins writes:
> How much of a barrier to entry to new or small mailing list providers
> (or new domains being used there) does this cause?
That depends on how badly a missing conditional signature "deprecates"
a list.
There are three ways deprecation can happen:
1. By reducing the risk of false positives, recipients may be
encouraged to lower the threshold at which a message is considered
spam.
I think that is unlikely to be a strong effect.
2. Some recipient domains may be tempted to *add* "spamminess" to
indirect messages without conditional signature, rather than
*subtract* (or in addition to subtracting) spamminess in the
presence of a valid conditional signature.
I don't know how likely that is to be a significant effect, but it
seems unlikely to me at the current p=reject domains.
3. Some recipient domains may be encourage to specify p=reject DMARC
policies.
I think this unlikely.
So yes, there is obviously a competitive advantage to lists that are
already on the "conditional signature" list of providers that specify
p=reject. But I don't think it raises a new barrier to entry for
small/new lists.
Steve
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
