Re: [dmarc-discuss] RUF reports

2017-01-05 Thread Roland Turner via dmarc-discuss
. - Roland From: dmarc-discuss <dmarc-discuss-boun...@dmarc.org> on behalf of Jim Popovitch via dmarc-discuss <dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org> Sent: Friday, 6 January 2017 09:32 To: dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org Subject: [dmarc-discuss] RUF reports Hello, I've been tr

Re: [dmarc-discuss] RUF reports

2017-01-05 Thread Jim Popovitch via dmarc-discuss
On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 10:05 PM, Steven M Jones wrote: > On 01/05/2017 17:32, Jim Popovitch via dmarc-discuss wrote: >> I've been trying, albeit slowly, to determine why I haven't seen any >> RUF reports since Sept 2016. >> >> Shouldn't this RUA report also produce a corresponding

Re: [dmarc-discuss] RUF reports

2017-01-05 Thread Steven M Jones via dmarc-discuss
On 01/05/2017 17:32, Jim Popovitch via dmarc-discuss wrote: > I've been trying, albeit slowly, to determine why I haven't seen any > RUF reports since Sept 2016. > > Shouldn't this RUA report also produce a corresponding RUF? Are you DKIM signing these messages? Because I notice the reason given

[dmarc-discuss] RUF reports

2017-01-05 Thread Jim Popovitch via dmarc-discuss
Hello, I've been trying, albeit slowly, to determine why I haven't seen any RUF reports since Sept 2016. Shouldn't this RUA report also produce a corresponding RUF? http://domainmail.org/dmarc-reports/126.com%21inug.org%211483574400%211483660799.xml -Jim P.