Franck Martin writes: > 2) Mailing lists should be able to differentiate between an Hard > bounce and a Soft bounce (by now). > > http://www.iana.org/assignments/smtp-enhanced-status-codes/smtp-enhanced-status-codes.xhtml > is 7 years old now.
They can, but the problem that caused collateral damage to subscribers is hard bounces, and "p=reject" is a hard bounce. Perhaps you mean discriminating between "technical hard bounces" and "policy hard bounces", but even there (a) I don't understand why you think there's a difference in the way the ML should treat them, and (b) many receiving sites deliberately conceal policy bounces, and especially the reason for them. _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
