> On 3 Feb 2026, at 08:46, Jeroen Massar <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> On 2 Feb 2026, at 19:05, John R. Levine <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I’ll add my support to (1). >> >> As do I. I would rather do this sooner than later because I also have run >> into people who wrongly believe that it's important for them to spend time >> and money adding ARC support to their code and I'd like to be able to tell >> them, no, save your effort for DKIM2. > > I added ARC support 6 years ago to certain largish PGP remailer and it has > been sending large swaths of mail to the large mailbox providers, read: > Google + Microsoft/Outlook, and as per some stats going around the Internet > that is >70% of email worldwide. > > Noting that both Microsoft and Google both support ARC.
They both sign with ARC and that is only half of ARC. As far as I'm aware neither company has said that they use ARC on the incoming mail streams. It’s very possible I missed their statements on the fact. Has either company mentioned they’re using it as part of their delivery engine? > As such, might be a good idea if it is decided to shutter ARC to have an exit > plan for these setups… > > Thus a document to mark as historic and why it is marked as historic, thus > what the short comings are and how to disable ARC support slowly, without it > causing any delivery issues might be a good idea... The information I’ve seen is that ARC isn’t actually very useful on the inbound (Fastmail and Richard’s day job). Do we have any comments from any inbound that says they’re using and relying on ARC? [snip] laura -- The Delivery Expert Laura Atkins Word to the Wise [email protected] Delivery hints and commentary: http://www.wordtothewise.com/blog
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
