It appears that Murray S. Kucherawy <[email protected]> said: >-=-=-=-=-=- > >On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 8:59 PM Douglas Foster < >[email protected]> wrote: > >> MUST seems to take us back to the unfinished debate of 3 years ago, where >> some asserted that DMARC did more harm than good and should only be used >> for transactional mail, which seemed to mean PayPal and not much else. > >Have we concluded that DMARC (or "reject" in particular) is now appropriate >for use with non-transactional mail?
I haven't seen any objections to using it for bulk broadcast mail, but that may be because the recipients don't care whether they get it. The canonical example paypal sends rather odd mail, a high value domain that sends only low value messages, since the only thing paypal sends are variations on something happened, log in and check your account. R's, John _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
