On 10/19/20 7:17 AM, Brotman, Alex wrote: > Sure, I think Masaki Kase is suggesting roughly the same thing (along with IP > address). Tell the domain who is the entity responsible for attempting this > delivery? This might need to be a hash of some sort.
> I think this sort of data would benefit both the domain holder, but as you > suggested, also the ESP. They could aggregate their own data to show > drift/misconfiguration. And yes, as you also suggest, sometimes the DNS guys > change things that the MarComm team doesn't know about, believing they're > doing the proper thing. ESPs who hash/obscure the customer ID may want to consider a special support portal for mailop->ESP questions. It would be frustrating to be sent to front-line agents and given the stiff arm. >> 3) Domains that don't have a DMARC record > [Brotman, Alexander] > > It might be possible, depending how this were created, to have a "Senders > DMARC" Policy, without a proper DMARC policy. Perhaps marginally useful to > the domain. Sent to where, postmaster? Jesse _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
