In addition to Vladimir's post, M3AAWG just published an SPF best practices
paper that might be useful:
https://www.m3aawg.org/sites/default/files/m3aawg_managing-spf_records-2017-08.pdf
Seth
On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 1:00 PM, Pete Holzmann via dmarc-discuss <
dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org> wrote:
> Vl
On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 9:49 AM, DMARC via dmarc-discuss <
dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org> wrote:
> Any ideas how many DMARC reports would actually be sent to the sending
> domain ? The organization, behind my question, sends to approx. 16k unique
> domains/day.
>
If we're talking about aggregate report
SPF macros are universally supported and correctly evaluated to the best
of my knowledge
On Mon, Dec 30, 2019 at 5:46 AM Ivan Kovachev via dmarc-discuss <
dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Are SPF macros widely supported / evaluated correctly by recipients? Is
> there any major players
Yes, Kurt and I have been working closely with the team implementing this.
Currently, AFAIK Microsoft's ARC implementation is internal only and is not
yet expected to interoperate with external systems.
There are conversations in progress about how to apply this in the future;
there will probably
The Microsoft ARC headers that I've seen have all validated; I wonder if
something new is broken.
Can you share what you're seeing?
On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 1:39 PM John Levine via dmarc-discuss <
dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org> wrote:
> In article <0746ea03-c242-1020-7df8-f087f58a0...@crash.com> you wri
I've already noted for DMARCbis
On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 11:08 AM Brotman, Alex via dmarc-discuss <
dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org> wrote:
> Yeah, I got a few private replies that stated roughly the same. We do log
> the policy at evaluation time, but I’ve probably not noticed that someone
> altered the
