Hi Phillip,
At 10:04 17-05-2014, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
Yet more special pleading.
[snip]
A legitimate argument against DMARC would be 'Here is a research study
based on empirical evidence that shows DMARC does not help'', it might
not be persuasive but it would be a valid argument to have. I am
Yes.
I find the arguments that IETF should ignore the impact of DMARC
unpersuasive. We have changed email repeatedly in response to non
standards compliant actions taken by the spam senders. So there is a
precedent for responding to malicious actions, why would we treat
non-malicious actions differently?
The significant change I can think of is the MSA/MTA split. That was
in 1998. There is a specification violation in response to a DMARC
policy as implementers do have to decide whether to provide a fix or
ignore the issue. There are also operational issues, e.g.
http://www.it.cornell.edu/services/guides/email/issues.cfm Should
the IETF ignore the impact of all this? Frankly, I don't know. It
is a significant amount of work to assess how much of a problem this is.
Regards,
S. Moonesamy