<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]--><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Verdana;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><a name="_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I wouldn’t be so quick to say that – generic spam reporting FBLs and receiver-specific programs are common. It’s just very difficult
to say go build yet another one without first having demonstrated the reporting being suitably orthogonal or, as you point out, coming with a giant carrot for the receiver.<o:p></o:p></span></a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">The point is that DMARC allows the legitimate owner of a domain to declare their policy, it does other interesting things but that’s essentially it.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> dmarc-discuss-bounces@blackops.org [mailto:dmarc-discuss-bounces@blackops.org]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Adrian<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, March 05, 2012 6:32 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Mitchell Webb; dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [dmarc-discuss] DMARC limitations<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">If I were a receiver I probably wouldn't be too interested in providing senders with feedback and getting nothing in return. If these parameters were not implemented in DMARC and receivers define the policies
themselves, then there is no point in this entire thing, surely?<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:navy">
<hr size="2" width="75%" align="left">
</span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:navy">On 6 Mar 2012 02:02, Mitchell Webb <<a href="mailto:dmarcmarcd@yahoo.com">dmarcmarcd@yahoo.com</a>> wrote:
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">The incentive for receivers would be they could justifiably tighten their receiving criteria (protecting the users) while having provided senders with information about legitimate / forged emails and their subsequent processing. This could
further be expanded to include black/whitelists, content filtering etc...<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">
<hr size="1" width="100%" align="center">
</span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif""> Adrian <<a href="mailto:adrian@hardy.bz">adrian@hardy.bz</a>><br>
<b>To:</b> Mitchell Webb <<a href="mailto:dmarcmarcd@yahoo.com">dmarcmarcd@yahoo.com</a>>
<br>
<b>Cc:</b> "<a href="mailto:dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org">dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org</a>" <<a href="mailto:dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org">dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org</a>>
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, March 5, 2012 8:47 PM<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [dmarc-discuss] DMARC limitations</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div id="yiv1203295484">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">Where is the incentive for receivers to implement DMARC if it is just to provide feedback to senders?<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 1:20 AM, Mitchell Webb <<a href="mailto:dmarcmarcd@yahoo.com" target="_blank">dmarcmarcd@yahoo.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Do the following DMARC parameters "overstep" the bounds that should be allowed of a sending domain?<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">pct Sampling rate<br>
p Requested handling policy<br>
sp Requested handling policy for subdomains<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">As they are requests would it not be better for the policy configuration responsibility to rest solely on the receiving mail server? This would essentially relegate DMARC to a reporting system only.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
dmarc-discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org" target="_blank">dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org</a><br>
<a href="http://www.dmarc.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc-discuss" target="_blank">http://www.dmarc.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc-discuss</a><br>
NOTE: Participating in this list means you agree to the DMARC Note Well terms (<a href="http://www.dmarc.org/note_well.html">http://www.dmarc.org/note_well.html</a>)<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>