On Wed, Apr 3, 2024 at 4:16 AM Alessandro Vesely wrote:
> > So what are you suggesting should go in this document that's in WGLC?
>
> Section 8.6 states the ML problem very well, but it says nothing about the
> way forward.
Here, we agree. And I'm saying: If we have anything concrete we can
In response to Ale's comment that we describe the mailing list problem
without defining a path forward, I suggest the text below.
Doug Foster
Some legitimate messages are sent on behalf of an individual account, based
on an established relationship between the sender and the account owner,
but
On 02/04/2024 20:16, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
On Tue, Apr 2, 2024 at 9:01 AM Alessandro Vesely wrote:
By now, most mailing lists arranged to either rewrite From: or not break
DKIM signatures. We all hope those hacks are temporary.
What do you mean by "temporary", given the time scales
On Wed, Apr 3, 2024 at 5:21 AM Laura Atkins wrote:
>
> On 1 Apr 2024, at 13:18, Brotman, Alex 40comcast@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>
> One item left out of Seth’s text is that due to MBPs who act in this
> fashion, these SPF evaluation failures will (understandably) not show up in
> DMARC
> On 1 Apr 2024, at 13:18, Brotman, Alex
> wrote:
>
> One item left out of Seth’s text is that due to MBPs who act in this fashion,
> these SPF evaluation failures will (understandably) not show up in DMARC
> reports, and the domain owner may not have visibility for these failures.
>
