Re: [dmarc-ietf] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-psd-01.txt

2019-02-05 Thread John Levine
In article <6596039.Rh8MxG5e5K@kitterma-e6430> you write: >The current PSL is over 12K lines long. What we're talking about here is >probably .1% to 1% that size. Indeed, but since everyone has the PSL anyway to find organizational domains, who cares about the size? The point of asking the PSL

Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC forensic reports (ruf=) and privacy

2019-02-05 Thread John Levine
In article <974c2d00017358cdf3b78037e4276234db2cfdee.ca...@aegee.org> you write: >Hello John, > >On Sat, 2019-01-26 at 11:31 -0500, John Levine wrote: >> … The failure reports are almost >> entirely useless. Of the ones I get, the majority are random Chinese >> spam that happened to forge one of

Re: [dmarc-ietf] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-psd-01.txt

2019-02-05 Thread Scott Kitterman
On Friday, January 18, 2019 04:14:42 AM Scott Kitterman wrote: > On Thursday, January 17, 2019 01:50:18 PM John Levine wrote: > > In article <3104294.rU99Ex2XNH@kitterma-e6430> you write: > > >My understanding is that, since, as you say, PSOs (like .bank) have a > > >pre- > > >existing relationship

Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC forensic reports (ruf=) and privacy

2019-02-05 Thread Дилян Палаузов
Hello John, On Sat, 2019-01-26 at 11:31 -0500, John Levine wrote: > … The failure reports are almost > entirely useless. Of the ones I get, the majority are random Chinese > spam that happened to forge one of my domains on the From line, the > rest are from mailing lists where I wouldn't expect