Re: WG Review: Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting & Conformance (dmarc)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On Jul 17, 2014, at 5:24 PM, "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 12:57 PM, Martin Rex <mrex@xxxxxxx> wrote:

And DMARC reporting needs to be killed.

Could you elaborate on why?  I only ask because some operators think the reporting is actually the more valuable thing DMARC has to offer, and you seem to have different information.

Beside it becoming a potential source for abuse, i.e. DoS, in general, once the proof of concepts are achieved, reporting becomes a wasteful, redundant high overhead part of the process.  This is why it I believe DMARC should be split into two; reporting and policy handling or reporting made an option for implementors who might only interested in the policy handling enforcement aspect and do not wish to be sending out reports -- we already know it works.

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]