In article <0127a137400d466095373373ec887...@bayviewphysicians.com> you write: >This example is a reminder that every message is a take-it-or-leave-it >proposition. You can accept >the message or reject it, based on the message characteristics, but you will >probably be unable to >cannot change the sender's behavior. In this situation, you may not like >having two signatures >from IETF, but you cannot change IETF. As a result, any spam filter needs >to be very flexible >about exceptions. Too many spam filters do not have adequate exception >mechanisms.
You missed an important point -- for any From: address that has a quarantine or reject DMARC policy, the IETF lists rewrite the address into the dmarc.ietf.org domain using a kludge I suggested to them. You shouldn't be seeing any mail from IETF lists failing dmarc with a dmarc policy. You'll see plenty that fails with p=none (this one probably) but any spam filter that rejects on DMARC failure with p=none is pretty badly broken. _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
