> -----Original Message----- > From: dmarc [mailto:dmarc-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tim Draegen > Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2014 3:34 PM > To: Scott Kitterman > Cc: dmarc@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] wiki vs. list? (was Re: documenting x-original-from > usage) > > On Oct 8, 2014, at 3:20 PM, Scott Kitterman <skl...@kitterman.com> wrote: > >> A bit ahead of the WG's focus. > > > > We have one? > > Ha! The WG is supposed to be focused on collecting all known issues > between DMARC and indirect email flows. Based on the collected set of > issues, we'll then switch gears and argue the heck out of possible solutions. >
To that point, everyone seems focused on MLMs. I was looking at data for DMARC pass/fail rates for IPs/hosts other than our own and was struck by the variability of the rates across various domains. Excluding "known bad actors", DMARC pass rates ranged from low 60-something percent up to mid-90 something percent. Such a large range is interesting. Because (aligned) SPF should almost always fail, the implication is that there are potentially better and worse ways to maintain the integrity of the DKIM signature in transit. Just a reminder, the mailstreams I'm looking at are transactional and overwhelmingly do not include traffic transiting mailing lists. Mike _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
