Re: [dmarc-ietf] Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows

[John Levine <[e-mail]>]

It appears that Dotzero  <[e-mail]> said:
>While the you part of "we" may not see any advantages, quite a few
>financials, greeting card sites, retailers AND many receivers have seen the
>advantages, including p=reject. ...

The advantages you see are certainly real but they're not about interoperability.

DMARC prevents a lot of mail from being delivered, the exact opposite
of interoperating. In your case at least, there are good reasons to
believe that the recipients wouldn't have wanted the mail, but that's
a separate question.  

I also think that you're kind of an edge case, with a mail stream that
you can characterize very exactly and a clear understanding of the
costs of the mail that gets lost.  People who know they have users
on mailing lists and publish p=reject anyway, not so much.

I'm with Scott, there's no question about the interop problem so
document it and move on.

R's,
John