In message <0B08F94B-FD02-462F-9E74-E6CE7F85ECC9(_at_)frobbit(_dot_)se>,
=?iso-8859-1?Q?Patrik_F=E4ltstr=F6m?= writes:
On 29 apr 2014, at 13:22, Mikael Abrahamsson
<swmike(_at_)swm(_dot_)pp(_dot_)se> 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(_at_)isc(_dot_)org