It appears that Andrew C Aitchison via mailop said:
>X-Face was too far ahead of its time. Enough of the market did not have
>the bandwidth to make it practical, and digitisers/cameras were not
>readily available.
It was, and it also predated phishing. All of the complication of BIMI
comes from
It appears that Tarun Singh via mailop said:
>Do we have folks from TWC (Time Warner Cable) on this distro? Can you please
>reach out to me offline?
It was merged into Charter's Spectrum quite a while ago.
R's,
John
___
mailop mailing list
On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 4:15 PM Brett Schenker via mailop
wrote:
> so please try again to justify why this is needed
>
I don't think I have to. The actual reasons and motivations are laid out on
that page.
And if you try a little harder you can even listen to me talk about it
elsewhere on the
I did, not sure there was some major outcry from those who receive email
about not seeing logos. Authentication was argued as a reason for this from
the start. That reason has been diminished, so please try again to justify
why this is needed
On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 6:22 PM Marcel Becker via
+1
On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 6:14 PM Louis Laureys via mailop
wrote:
> We decided to keep this because I read that some webmail clients are
> planning to support BIMI without checking for certificates, or,
> perhaps, also displaying a little lock icon in the corner of the
> sender's BIMI-style
On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 2:38 PM Brett Schenker wrote:
> I've read that, multiple times.
>
Then I am sure you read everything on that page and not just the first
sentence.
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
> We decided to keep this because I read that some webmail clients are
> planning to support BIMI without checking for certificates, or,
> perhaps, also displaying a little lock icon in the corner of the
> sender's BIMI-style logo image where certification is verified.
This is exactly what I have
> Simply, nobody needs this.
I've been building an email client and actually do fetch avatars and logos to be
displayed next to emails. I find it helps me visually identify emails easier,
it's a lot less taxing on the brain than reading sender names or addresses. Of
course in my case I'm also
That's great to hear Grant!
We had no contact from Microsoft for a few days and all of a sudden the
issue disappeared, but nobody took credit.
I tried to follow up through the tickets that we had, but we were not able
to find anyone who would say they did anything, and basically said the
issue
I've read that, multiple times.
"BIMI promotes authentication, which is instrumental in protecting against
some forms of abuse."
Cool, Google and Yahoo just made it a necessity for bulk sending which
downthread it has been said this is who this is primarily for.
So, I ask again, with Google
On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 1:12 PM Brett Schenker via mailop
wrote:
> Since DMARC is now required by Google and Yahoo for bulk sending, it kind
> of makes BIMI not as needed. I'm still not sure what BIMI solves that
> enforcing authentication doesn't.
>
https://bimigroup.org/mailbox-providers/
Since DMARC is now required by Google and Yahoo for bulk sending, it kind
of makes BIMI not as needed. I'm still not sure what BIMI solves that
enforcing authentication doesn't.
On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 3:44 PM Gellner, Oliver via mailop <
mailop@mailop.org> wrote:
>
> > On 10.01.2024 at 17:21
We looked into it and publish our own default BIMI record even
though we didn't pay the enormous amount money required to one of two
Certificate Authorities.
If anyone is curious to see what the record looks, use this command:
dig txt
> On 10.01.2024 at 17:21 Olga Fischer via mailop wrote:
>
> Many bigger mailers are blogging about BIMI.
> As far as I see its exclusively for brands.
> It has 2 big barriers for entry:
> - Expensive bespoke cert oids
> - Registered trademark logos
>
> As from my perspective of independent
Hello All,
Do we have folks from TWC (Time Warner Cable) on this distro? Can you please
reach out to me offline?
Thanks
-Tarun
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 9:34 AM Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop
wrote:
> NOBODY NEEDS THESE IMAGES.
>
You are certainly entitled to that opinion. But what do we really need?
Quite a philosophical question...
-- Marcel
___
mailop mailing list
On Wed, 10 Jan 2024, Jaroslaw Rafa via mailop wrote:
As the OP has written, the only ones that may be interested in this may be
marketers. Nobody else needs any logos, avatars etc. displayed alongside the
email headers. There is a reason why the early attempt at this - I'm talking
about the
On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 8:20 AM Olga Fischer via mailop
wrote:
>
> How will common platforms show user2user?
> Will they use platform logos? No logos?
>
BIMI is for organizational logos. Personal avatars and profile pictures are
for people. It's really simple.
-- Marcel
On Wed, 10 Jan 2024, Olga Fischer via mailop wrote:
Hi mailops,
I am new here because I want to collect some opinion.
Many bigger mailers are blogging about BIMI.
As far as I see its exclusively for brands.
It has 2 big barriers for entry:
- Expensive bespoke cert oids
- Registered trademark
Dnia 10.01.2024 o godz. 11:32:36 Seth Blank via mailop pisze:
> The hope is that as BIMI gets more widely adopted, the cost (and
> automation) of the logo validation drops. Time will tell.
>
> Of course, for broader adoption, we also need to progress beyond
> trademarks, which have their own cost
It's not a money grabbing scheme. Validation of the logo requires human
effort today, so there's a real cost involved. It's also relatively new, so
at its most expensive.
The hope is that as BIMI gets more widely adopted, the cost (and
automation) of the logo validation drops. Time will tell.
Of
Hi mailops,
I am new here because I want to collect some opinion.
Many bigger mailers are blogging about BIMI.
As far as I see its exclusively for brands.
It has 2 big barriers for entry:
- Expensive bespoke cert oids
- Registered trademark logos
As from my perspective of independent mailing
Hi All,
We finally got this resolved on our side. From the tech that eventually
managed to get it sorted:
As for the correct process, annoyingly this is only possible internally,
there's no customer facing portal where you are able to request domain
delisting in this way. If this does come
23 matches
Mail list logo
