Scott Kitterman writes:
> [important discussion clipped for brevity]
> If you want to add it and are confident we aren't diving into a deep,
> deep hole, I don't strongly object. Just let me know what to add.
Well, my review amounted to about 5 pages of ordinary text, and my
follow-up e-mail abo
In article <2656238.kvSPeydUtl@sk-desktop> you write:
>There is probably protocol improvement work that should be done based on:
>
>https://www.usenix.org/system/files/sec20fall_chen-jianjun_prepub_0.pdf
I didn't see any protocol issues other than the well known DKIM
multiple From: headers (the Do
Extracting from the abstract of a paper in process by Casey Deccio (now
researching SPF at BYU, formerly at Cisco):
Our techniques elicit SPF and DMARC validation activity of the servers,
> while minimizing spam and perceived abuse. We find that only 25% of mail
> servers and less than half of dom
There is probably protocol improvement work that should be done based on:
https://www.usenix.org/system/files/sec20fall_chen-jianjun_prepub_0.pdf
Scott K
___
dmarc mailing list
dmarc@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
