> On 21 Jul 2021, at 18:24, Dave Crocker <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 7/21/2021 1:28 AM, Laura Atkins wrote: >> This is going to cause difficulties in deployment for a lot of companies and >> domains. Experience tells us that p=quarantine pct=0 detects forwarders and >> other types systems that modify and break DMARC authentication. These >> systems are undetectable when p=none is in place. > > How is this 'detection' actually used? That is, what is then done > differently?
Please review the list archives for previous discussion of why p=0 is important. The part of the message you clipped indicates I was specifically commenting on removing pct=0, which group consensus from May 27 says we keep. If it’s possible to remove 1 - 99 that gets a +1 from me. > On 7/21/2021 10:19 AM, John Levine wrote: >> I suppose we could leave pct=0 as a hint to forwarders to turn on their >> DMARC evasion hacks. > > Why doesn't seeing DMARC as seeing that it isn't p=none outght to suffice for > that? There was a long discussion on this list at the end of 2020 describing why pct=0 is an important step in deployment. 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
