> On Oct 22, 2015, at 3:43 PM, Payne, John <jpa...@akamai.com> wrote: > > >> On Oct 22, 2015, at 3:36 PM, Andrew Beverley via dmarc-discuss >> <dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org> wrote: >> >> On Thu, 2015-10-22 at 10:19 -0700, Franck Martin via dmarc-discuss >> wrote: >>> The fun is moving to ARC >>> >>> https://dmarc.org/2015/10/global-mailbox-providers-deploying-dmarc-to-protect-users/ >> >> Sad to see that Gmail plan to move to p=reject > > I’m hoping that it encourages the mailing list folk who have been reluctant > to become DMARC safe to reconsider, whether thats ARC or wrapping. > As an enterprise hoping to go p=reject, this is potentially a big deal for me > :)
I’m not exactly in the loop, but besides this article almost a year ago, I haven’t seen anything else about gmail going p=reject… and it’s now 3 months past the advertised date. Any word there? Somewhat related (to my earlier post) - are there any _enterprises_ on this list that have experience or are currently attempting to either go p=reject or enforce DMARC policies inbound? Thanks John
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)
