I’m the Author of that pamphlet and yes „slow-entry“ stands for rate limiting,
as we do not plan to reject traffic completly, I also would like to mention
that this is a WIP document and I’m fascinated that it pops up here, as it only
was a small comment on a completly different topic. I would also like to
emphasis that this is not directly DMARC related as the goal we want to achieve
is different and we also plan to bring our DMARC implementation forward at the
same time.
/ Tobias Herkula
--
Senior Product Owner Mail Security
Product Mail Platform
1&1 Mail & Media GmbH
Von: dmarc Im Auftrag von Douglas Foster
Gesendet: Sonntag, 24. Oktober 2021 19:37
An: Alessandro Vesely
Cc: dmarc-ietf
Betreff: Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC variations
What is meant by "slow entry" in the title? Does it mean that non-compliant
messages will be throttled with 4xx temporay failure result codes?
On Sun, Oct 24, 2021, 10:51 AM Alessandro Vesely
mailto:ves...@tana.it>> wrote:
Hi all,
this proposal by some German mailbox providers sounds interesting:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vQeodijKJJJPX6fCma3tm00n8m0aJI0VyuO17hKXTy0y7JYUzIxd5Cqh2VSttvJkw-yxWK5fT8NFDcO/pub
Note that it "is not directly referencing DMARC as a technology with similar
functionalities, as [they] strive to establish a common ground, where DMARC,
BIMI and future Systems can build up additional benefits for all sides."
Best
Ale
--
___
dmarc mailing list
dmarc@ietf.org<mailto:dmarc@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
___
dmarc mailing list
dmarc@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
