[arc-discuss] [dmarc-discuss] A bit quiet?
roland at rolandturner.com
Thu Nov 26 17:40:21 PST 2015
On 11/27/2015 03:01 AM, Dave Warren via arc-discuss wrote:
> On 2015-10-29 10:49, Shal Farley via arc-discuss wrote:
>> Hence the need for deliverability monitoring, as Roland points out.
>> That is, if you (the list operator) have the manpower to salt the
>> world's mailbox providers with test accounts to monitor. Even if
>> limited to the systems identified by the list service's outbound mail
>> logs, that could get daunting.
>> If that's not already a service for hire, maybe it should be.
>> Probably more useful than just listing who does and who does not
>> examine ARC headers.
> I'm not sure how useful it will be anyway, with all the large
> providers making filtering decisions based on individual recipient's
> You can certainly get a rough idea of what is going on, but all of the
> past mail sent to the aforementioned test account and the way the
> "user" acts toward that (or doesn't) will impact future deliverability
> to that one mailbox in a way that may not reflect on other mailboxes.
I suspect that you're looking for a little too much precision. Bear in
mind that there can be additional downstream forwarding, some of it also
DKIM-breaking. At best, using this sort of monitoring to make inferences
about DMARC behaviour in order to make decisions about list processing
is about the 95% case, you'll never get a perfect picture. That said,
anyone operating seedboxes in this way would presumably treat them in
such a way as to get as accurate a read about the receiver's default
behaviour as possible (e.g. neither putting senders in their address
book, nor complaining about them).
1: Perhaps higher, but not 100%.
More information about the arc-discuss