On 28/10/17 06:55, Dave Crocker via dmarc-discuss wrote:
There's a meta-lesson here, given how relatively mature and
heavily-used DMARC is, which ought to make it surprising that this
sort of thing pops up this late.
But I can't figure out what sort of productive statement to make to
describ
ttps://publicsuffix.org/
- Original Message -
From: "Brandon Long via dmarc-discuss"
To: st...@wordtothewise.com
Cc: "DMARC Discussion List"
Sent: Friday, October 27, 2017 6:45:58 PM
Subject: Re: [dmarc-discuss] Google not sending aggregate reports for my .US
TLD
yea
On 10/27/2017 3:51 PM, Steve Atkins via dmarc-discuss wrote:
The p= tag must come immediately after the v=DMARC1. Google is apparently
ignoring your record while the other receivers are ignoring the spec.
...
I recommend moving the p= tag to be right after v=DMARC; and see what happens.
/me
> On Oct 27, 2017, at 3:33 PM, John Wilson via dmarc-discuss
> wrote:
>
> Tyler,
>
> The p= tag must come immediately after the v=DMARC1. Google is apparently
> ignoring your record while the other receivers are ignoring the spec.
>
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7489#section-6.4
>
Oh, g
yeah, seems reasonable, I'll file a bug.
Brandon
On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 3:44 PM Steve Atkins via dmarc-discuss <
dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org> wrote:
>
> > On Oct 27, 2017, at 3:15 PM, Tyler South via dmarc-discuss <
> dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org> wrote:
> >
> > The domain in question is cssi.us
> >
>
On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 3:27 PM, Steve Atkins via dmarc-discuss
wrote:
>
>> On Oct 27, 2017, at 3:20 PM, Brandon Long wrote:
>>
>> Isn't .us usually considered a 3 level tld, like .uk and .au? And DMARC
>> says to ignore tlds.
>
> Neustar decided second level domains were more valuable 15 years
> On Oct 27, 2017, at 3:15 PM, Tyler South via dmarc-discuss
> wrote:
>
> The domain in question is cssi.us
>
> Thanks for any assistance you can provide.
>
Looks reasonable to me.
v=DMARC1;rua=mailto:983a6a4164b9...@rep.dmarcanalyzer.com,mailto:dmarc...@cssi.us;ruf=mailto:983a6a4164b9...@f
Tyler,
The p= tag must come immediately after the v=DMARC1. Google is apparently
ignoring your record while the other receivers are ignoring the spec.
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7489#section-6.4
I recommend moving the p= tag to be right after v=DMARC; and see what
happens.
Good luck!
On F
> On Oct 27, 2017, at 3:20 PM, Brandon Long wrote:
>
> Isn't .us usually considered a 3 level tld, like .uk and .au? And DMARC says
> to ignore tlds.
Neustar decided second level domains were more valuable 15 years ago or so, and
it's mostly sold as a generic two level TLD now.
Given the hi
Isn't .us usually considered a 3 level tld, like .uk and .au? And DMARC
says to ignore tlds.
Brandon
On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 3:01 PM Steve Atkins via dmarc-discuss <
dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org> wrote:
>
> > On Oct 27, 2017, at 2:08 PM, Tyler South via dmarc-discuss <
> dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org> wr
The domain in question is cssi.us
Thanks for any assistance you can provide.
On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 5:08 PM, Tyler South wrote:
> Hey everyone,
>
>
> We’ve been trying to track down what could possibly be causing this issue.
> Google nevers send an aggregate report for our .US domain.
>
>
> We
> On Oct 27, 2017, at 2:08 PM, Tyler South via dmarc-discuss
> wrote:
>
> Hey everyone,
>
>
> We’ve been trying to track down what could possibly be causing this issue.
> Google nevers send an aggregate report for our .US domain.
>
>
>
> We get aggregate reports from AOL, Yahoo, and Outlo
12 matches
Mail list logo
