IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] Modeling MLM behavior

Hector Santos <hsantos@isdg.net> Mon, 06 October 2014 23:15 UTC

Return-Path: <hsantos@isdg.net>
X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 580CD1A902E for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Oct 2014 16:15:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hOkzr7vbi_6x for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Oct 2014 16:15:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from news.winserver.com (groups.winserver.com [208.247.131.9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42A3F1A8BBD for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Mon, 6 Oct 2014 16:15:51 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; d=isdg.net; s=tms1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/relaxed; l=5149; t=1412637346; h=Received:Received: Message-Id:From:Subject:Date:To:Organization:List-ID; bh=haUDnYP UzpqV4Qy7s2gvVn4Sccc=; b=OenYSqtcD7f9ikn/vhtvYWQLZZFwr7QELTcWk7J GY6drTid4r/Fk6Il9roLKtGynQht+vWsgFkwiNIthVt+6JJ1s++rkJosM39GvUhP WCr4PEhbaJlkzo4Bl55eoeL4vqZuyB3hmI4x6WliqQwWym8/wJbxmrzRuY5rpPqd 2K80=
Received: by winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP Router v7.0.454.4) for dmarc@ietf.org; Mon, 06 Oct 2014 19:15:46 -0400
Received: from [192.168.1.221] (99-72-160-212.lightspeed.miamfl.sbcglobal.net [99.72.160.212]) by winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP v7.0.454.4) with ESMTP id 3527416547.12383.5940; Mon, 06 Oct 2014 19:15:44 -0400
References: <20140918134416.2051.qmail@joyce.lan> <541BABD0.10506@rolandturner.com> <87zjdvzzt1.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <541D67F0.5070800@tana.it> <AF94A228-269D-4CB3-B0DE-0529A2C72F03@eudaemon.net> <CAL0qLwYPz6vuVDrj1yf8Pxn5-bD049UtSEW_wtwE_SMsUXL+Ow@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
In-Reply-To: <CAL0qLwYPz6vuVDrj1yf8Pxn5-bD049UtSEW_wtwE_SMsUXL+Ow@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail-AE5921A7-DF38-49AE-A156-D4712AB3C111"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <3556AB25-5376-48C3-A865-A99D23F946A3@isdg.net>
X-Mailer: iPad Mail (12A405)
From: Hector Santos <hsantos@isdg.net>
Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2014 19:15:44 -0400
To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/WMd8upCD5iQDpXpD4sNZ8maHykE
Cc: "dmarc@ietf.org" <dmarc@ietf.org>, Tim Draegen <tim@eudaemon.net>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Modeling MLM behavior
X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" <dmarc.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dmarc>, <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dmarc/>
List-Post: <mailto:dmarc@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc>, <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2014 23:15:58 -0000

Murray, I think we need to make the distinction of two different concepts and acronyms; MLM "Mailing List Manager" and MLS "Mail List Servers" that serve the MLM market.  There are some basic integration guidelines for both the MLS and MLM.  I understand we don't want to make any changes, but the front-end, receivers, websites, i.e.  Potential Entry Points, do need implementation change considerations.

I was able to minimize direct MLS changes to nil and added a few MLM operator features to existing operator configuration capabilities to fit into a DKIM+ADSP+ATPS Mail I/O backend aware framework.  I am waiting to do the DMARC plug and play, swap.

The 2006 DSAP draft section 3.3 Mailing List Servers suggest some simple basic concepts that I believe is near universal. But by 2009, the actual suggested implementation changes were done outside the MLS component.   See my point? 

--
Hector Santos
http://www.santronics.com

> On Oct 6, 2014, at 4:24 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy <superuser@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Tim Draegen <tim@eudaemon.net> wrote:
>> On Sep 20, 2014, at 7:41 AM, Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it> wrote:
>> > IMHO, we should specify a credible MLM model, even if that can be
>> > slightly off topic for the WG, in order to maximize its probability of
>> > being adopted.  The rest of this message has some notes to this end.
> 
> Can I get some clarification on the intent here?  As worded, this paragraph suggests that we are looking to produce a model for MLMs to follow in a DMARC-aware world.  I was under the impression that (a) this is a non-starter, and (b) we're not chartered to do so.
> 
> -MSK
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dmarc mailing list
> dmarc@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email