On Apr 8, 2015, at 5:32 PM, John R Levine <jo...@taugh.com> wrote: >> So why is DMARC any more useful than these "hacks"? > > Good question. As originally intended, DMARC was for mail from sources where > a failure reliably meant phish. Then AOL and Yahoo repurposed it to push > their support costs onto other people, and its value has been under debate > ever since.
Also a major reason that people who were dubious about SPF policy and extremely dubious about ADSP supported DMARC was that it has reporting and dry run functionality. Run it in p=none mode; use the reports to make sure that nothing breaks; if nothing breaks switch to p=reject. I didn't think that anyone significant would skip the testing, reporting and decision making steps and leap directly to intentionally breaking email for their users their users' correspondents. Cheers, Steve _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
