On Jun 7, 2014, at 7:44 PM, Dave Crocker <d...@dcrocker.net> wrote: > On 6/7/2014 7:31 PM, Franck Martin wrote: >> But the claim is that these workarounds will mainly happen after you do >> DMARC p=reject. This data is coming in a not too distant future now. > > > Keeping in mind that the mailing list scenario has always been > legitimate use, the concern is that we may be left with a long-term > barrier to that use, with no attendant long-term benefit.
It has always been clear with p=reject a domain cannot have email addresses subscribed to mailing lists and be able to interact with other list members successfully/adequately. Mailing lists needed to protect themselves, but I consider that as a different problem. Now it seems you can have a p=reject and participate successfully in some mailing lists (like this one). > > The fact that there is short-term benefit is not the issue; it is that > the benefit might not sustain. > From the beginning the claim has always been to move the bad guys away from the real thing. I think we have already envisioned the future, we don’t know which one will hold. And as we say, this is our “Next Play”.
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ 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)
