In message <0B08F94B-FD02-462F-9E74-E6CE7F85ECC9@xxxxxxxxxx>, =?iso-8859-1?Q?Patrik_F=E4ltstr=F6m?= writes: > > On 29 apr 2014, at 13:22, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On the other hand, this will primarily cause direct problems to > users/customers of the organisations that decide to do "p=reject" as > their participation in mailing lists will be crippled. > > As Mikael says, this is a problem for people in those organisations that > choose to have such filter policy together with the de-facto > functionality of mailing lists out there. > > I ask myself as well what the problem is. > > If there was collateral damage on third parties, that would for me have > been a different thing. As far as I see here, there is not. The damage is > on the people that have chosen to have such policy (or customers of them). > > If I have completely misunderstood the situation, my apologies and I'll > go back and re-read the flood of email on the topic... :-) > > Patrik There is also collateral damage to anyone elso on the mailing list who implement DMARC as the SMTP rejections of the mailing list messages cause them to be unsubscribed from the mailing list. There is also collateral damage as administrators of the mail list have to remove the offending members. Mark -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@xxxxxxx