> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of J.D. > Falk > Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2011 7:24 PM > To: Message Abuse Report Format working group > Subject: Re: [marf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-marf-authfailure-report-00.txt > > If Delivery-Result: is required, then I expect we'll see a lot (perhaps > a majority) of implementations being intentionally non-standard and > omitting it anyway. Mailbox providers tend to be /very/ touchy about > who they'll share exact delivery results with, and for good reason: the > bad guys have lots of incentives to try to trick their way into > delivery feedback results that they can use to tune their spamming > systems. > > I'd urge making that an optional field, or possibly include a > null/refused value.
Just to be clear, you mean that in the context of auth-failure reports specifically, and not ARF in general? I'm thinking if you're willing to update your feedback generation system to support auth-failure reports, then you understand what's involved and would be willing to do this as well. But I don't run an FBL myself (yet) so I admit this is speculation. _______________________________________________ marf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf
