Re: WG Review: Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting & Conforma

I'll quote from 
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-announce/current/msg13031.html

   "Existing deployment of DMARC has demonstrated utility at internet
    scale"


indeed it has, except in a negative sort of way.

randy

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Re: WG Review: Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting & Conformance (dmarc)x, (continued) Re: WG Review: Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting & Conformance (dmarc)x, John C Klensin Re: WG Review: Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting & Conformance (dmarc)x, Dave Crocker Re: WG Review: Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting & Conformance (dmarc)x, John C Klensin Re: WG Review: Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting & Conformance (dmarc)x, Dave Crocker Re: WG Review: Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting & Conformance (dmarc)x, Stuart Barkley Re: WG Review: Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting & Conformance (dmarc)x, Randy Bush Re: WG Review: Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting & Conformance (dmarc)x, John Levine Re: WG Review: Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting & Conformance (dmarc)x, John R Levine Re: WG Review: Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting & Conformance (dmarc)x, John C Klensin Re: WG Review: Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting & Conformance (dmarc)x, Pete Resnick Re: WG Review: Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting & Conformance (dmarc), Randy Bush <= Re: WG Review: Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting & Conformance (dmarc), Eric Burger Re: [dmarc-ietf] WG Review: Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting & Conformance (dmarc), Hector Santos

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