Re: [dmarc-discuss] 2 questions about evaluating DMARC reports -- recommendations ?

Hello, I have uploaded an application for DMARC reports analysis, which I did for myself. If anyone wants to try it its here: https://github.com/petr22/DMARC-reports-analyzer You just need access to email with reports, web server and database. I think it shows you everything you need to find

Re: [dmarc-discuss] DMARC fail for our subdomains, why?

Hello, Return-Path: Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of r...@sd.md.se designates X as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=r...@sd.md.se; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=MD.se From:

Re: [dmarc-discuss] gmail's DMARC check doesn't respect subdomain policy

Well I just did it one step at a time :). First "p=none", then "p=reject sp=none" and finally "p=reject". I guess I could have done it straight from p=none to reject. Regards Petr Dne 13.12.2016 v 4:05 Roland Turner via dmarc-discuss napsal(a): Surely all of that subdomain sending

Re: [dmarc-discuss] gmail's DMARC check doesn't respect subdomain policy

Hi, Thanks for the advice. I have added MX for a.prnk.cz but the email still gets rejected by DMARC check(at least according to the reject message). Regards Petr Dne 08.12.2016 v 13:21 Vladimir Dubrovin napsal(a): It may be because a.prnk.cz doesn't has it's own MX record, so GMail

Re: [dmarc-discuss] gmail's DMARC check doesn't respect subdomain policy

o end of DATA command) Best Regards Petr Dne 08.12.2016 v 12:40 David Woodhouse napsal(a): On Thu, 2016-12-08 at 12:23 +0100, Petr Novák via dmarc-discuss wrote: thanks for the answer. I tried it with the empty line but the result is still the same. Still invalid as it lacks Date: heade

Re: [dmarc-discuss] gmail's DMARC check doesn't respect subdomain policy

gards Petr Dne 08.12.2016 v 12:11 A. Schulze via dmarc-discuss napsal(a): Petr Novák via dmarc-discuss: data 354 end data with . From: ad...@a.prnk.cz test mail. . looks invalid to me. there should be an empty line between "From" an &

Re: [dmarc-discuss] Getting to reject, was :Re: FortiNet’s FortiMail DMARC implementation

Well just so you know, I reported this bug to FortiNet almost a year ago 2015-12-09. That was when FortiMail got the DMARC implementation(firmware 5.3.0). Since that time we contacted their support, which gave us the answer I posted. So we tried to change it by contacting local Fortinet's

Re: [dmarc-discuss] Getting to reject, was :Re: FortiNet’s FortiMail DMARC implementation

Well if it wasn't by design then how do you explain this reply from your support team. quote: "I've got feedback from engineering on this. The current behavior is by design, the action for DMARC check failure is driven by the action next to the DMARC check (action-dmarc) no matter the DMARC

Re: [dmarc-discuss] FortiNet’s FortiMail DMARC implementation

Dne 14.11.2016 v 20:24 Steven M Jones via dmarc-discuss napsal(a): If the option were there to make those overrides I'd be more supportive, but it didn't sound like that was the case with this particular product/service. If somebody with access could clarify, I'd appreciate it. Yes this is