Quoting Bernard Rosset via Dng (dng@???):

> It seems we're drifting away from the main subject.
> Count me in!

Roger that! Subject header tweaked.

> ?
> If your emails are being refused by others, including major email
> hosters, I would kindly suggest you check you got at least correct
> SPF + DKIM entries. You can throw DMARC into the mix if you wish so,
> too.

Umm...

As I already mentioned upthread, my domains' e-mail continue to have
very high deliverability. Those domains feature strongly asserted SPF
RRs in their auth DNS.

However, by carefully considered local policy, I decline to also
implement DKIM/DMARC, considering those extensions to have been botched
in design and implementation by Yahoo, Inc. (DKIM seems to be the
keystone problem, there, particularly its hapless hostility to
MLM-mediated forwarding.) Empirically, I so far perceive no measurable
loss of host reputation from declining to implement DKIM/DMARC.

I _do_ publish, in each of my domains' DNS, deliberately non-compliant
DMARC RRs, just to make my stance quite clear, e.g.:

:r! dig -t txt _dmarc.linuxmafia.com @ns1.linuxmafia.com +short
"DMARC: tragically misdesigned since 2012. Check our SPF RR, instead."


> It's saddening to assess how little is known by the general public
> (including people who actually work on technical matters in IT) about
> key technologies, like DNS (the mother/father of all) or email.

True datum: When I began hosting my own SMTP smarthosts, I was still a
staff accountant (UK: chartered accountant) for a living, not a
sysadmin. Fortunately, nobody told me I couldn't do it, so it worked.