On 4/15/20 3:48 PM, John Levine wrote: > In article <65960f35-16b5-7889-5db1-c5c678015...@kamens.us> you write: >> For your edification, below, in domain rank order (from the >> https://domcop.com/openpagerank/ API), are the ranked domains that have >> bounced at least one DMARC aggregate report my mail server has tried to >> send them since I started tracking this in September 2018. >> >> There are a lot of domains on this list that are big enough that they >> really should be able to handle something as critical as not bouncing >> aggregate reports sent to the email address they advertise for them. > One rejected report in about 500 days is an 0.2% bounce rate. That seems > a bit extreme. I said /at least/ one, not /exactly /one. Once a site bounces a report I add them to an exclude list and stop trying to send them reports, so I don't actually know how many bounces any of these domains generated. I doubt it's just one. > Do you have an idea of why they're being rejected? Yahoo in > particular sometimes has bad days (I think due to DDoS) and defers or > fails to accept mail to anyone. It's nothing personal.
Reports whose delivery were deferred don't show up on my list; it's just for reports that were permanently bounced. And personally, I don't care why they bounced. Rejecting the reports means more work for the servers sending them and the people who maintain those servers, assuming that those people are trying to do the right thing as opposed to just black-holing bounces. If a site doesn't want to process the reports for whatever reason then they should accept them and throw them away, not bounce them. In my opinion It's a bad look for domains that can't manage even that reliably. When I first started maintaining the list of domains not to generate reports for, I did keep track of why they were bouncing, though I don't do that anymore. Here are some of the bounce causes I saw (not a comprehensive list, obviously): youtube.com: rate limiting on the RUA mailbox google.com: rate limiting on the RUA mailbox flattr.com: message content rejected trendmicro.com: connection timed out (for several days) pobox.com: DMARCIFY appears to be out of commission; Pobox has since switched to fastmaildmarc.com jik
_______________________________________________ dmarc-discuss mailing list dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org http://www.dmarc.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc-discuss NOTE: Participating in this list means you agree to the DMARC Note Well terms (http://www.dmarc.org/note_well.html)
