It appears that Jared Mauch said:
>Can someone flip the option in Mailman for DMARC please, it’s problematic as
>if one posts and does DMARC and has feedback on, our
>messages are possibly rejected, and the feedback from a post is quite large.
I checked with Jared and he seems to misunderstand
It appears that Michael Thomas via NANOG said:
>
>On 8/2/22 12:30 PM, Jim Popovitch via NANOG wrote:
>> It's been doing it for ages for p=reject, but not p=none (the latter
>> being Jared's situation)
I don't understand Jared's concern. His DMARC policy, like mine, is p=none
which tells receiver
In article <120a24d4e0da4f2392a25a8140be2...@ex1.obs.local> you write:
>We are parsing dmarc reports using parsedmarc and the forensics reports coming
>from antispamcloud.com seems not to
>follow the recommended reporting format (AFRF) and therefore are considered
>invalid.
You're right, they're
3 matches
Mail list logo
