> On Jul 27, 2018, at 7:03 AM, John R. Levine <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, 27 Jul 2018, Kurt Andersen (b) wrote: > >> This is not a matter of *whether* you reject during the SMTP interchange as >> how to do it in a meaningful way *if* you do so. The discussion about >> signaling that the domain authentication failure led to the rejection is >> the point of this section. > > Ah. I still think it should go, but if you really want to do that, invent a > new enhanced status code. They're cheap. 5.7.7 isn't right, it's more like > corrupt S/MIME bodies.
The enhanced status codes are often what ESPs use to make determinations about what to do with future email to that address. Different folks using the same code to mean different make interoperability challenging for bulk senders. If you do want an enhanced status code, pick one that’s not currently being used for something else. Or one that’s rarely used. Continuing to muddy the tar pit doesn’t help anyone. IOW, +1 to John’s “invent a new one” laura -- Having an Email Crisis? We can help! 800 823-9674 Laura Atkins Word to the Wise [email protected] (650) 437-0741 Email Delivery Blog: https://wordtothewise.com/blog
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
