It appears that Steven M Jones <[email protected]> said: >I agree we're not here to create or support a business model. IMO that >includes not removing part of the "self boot-strapping" option for DMARC >deployment, by making failure reporting only available as a pay-to-play >commercial service.
I don't understand this objection. 1. The point of failure reports was to help diagnose bugs in sending software, like broken DKIM signers. If that was ever an issue, it isn't now when people drop in debugged library code. The problem with getting all your mail aligned is tracking down all the funky places sending mail with your address on it, which is what the IP addresses in aggregate reports help you do. B. Unless my collection of failure reports is very unusual, basically nobody sends failure reports now, at least not without a private agreement to deal with the PII issues. If you set up a new domain and publish an ruf= tag, you're not going to get reports and it would be a cruel joke to tell people otherwise. If people want to make private arrangements, that's fine, but that's not what standards are about. R's, John _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
