Re: [dmarc-ietf] Call for Adoption: DMARC Use of the RFC5322.Sender Header Field

[Dotzero <[e-mail]>]

On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 10:46 AM Laura Atkins <[e-mail]>
wrote:

>
>
> On 14 Aug 2020, at 09:27, Dotzero <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>  Now I have come to the conclusion that they should reject list
> submissions from accounts at domains which publish a DMARC policy of
> p=reject. Domains should not be able to externalize their internal problems
> to others.
>
>
> This effectively cuts off users at multiple ISPs from ever participating
> in mailing lists. Which is exactly what we’re trying to fix with this
> proposal.
>

Does the proposal actually fix the problem? Does the proposal actually fix
the problem without creating other problems? After reading an re-reading
Dave's draft, my conclusion is that the answer is no to both questions.



>
> Just because a user has an address at a consumer mailbox provider that
> publishes p=reject does not make them a second class citizen banned from
> participating in any mailing list.
>

You are conflating the provision of Internet connectivity  with the
provision of email services. That ship sailed a long time ago. There are a
number of ISPs which no longer provide email accounts/port 25 services. If
a user with an account at one of those domains wanted to use their login as
an email address are you suggesting that others should send responses to
that "email address" even though no MX is available for that account and
mail will never reach that user? It is clear to me that a domain
owner/admin has the right to determine how that domain will or will not be
used. The individual is not banned from ever participating in a mailing
list. They simply can't use an account from that particular domain. There
are plenty of other places they can get an email account from. They also
have the opportunity to tell their existing provider they are unhappy with
policy. Providers can and do change their policies. For the longest time,
the address block associated with Amazon Simple Mail Service was a swamp of
badness. Legitimate users and organizations started deciding to not use
other Amazon AWS services as a result of their mail being blocked. Amazon
got religion and started cleaning up their mess. So yes, even large players
can respond to market and community pressures.

I'm not the person who initially suggested MLMs reject users/email from
domains that publish p=reject. That was John Levine. Perhaps he was being
sarcastic, perhaps not. It is certainly a forcing mechanism. And that may
just be what is needed for domains to think carefully about how they
implement DMARC.

Michael Hammer

>
> laura
>
> --
> Having an Email Crisis?  We can help! 800 823-9674
>
> Laura Atkins
> Word to the Wise
> [e-mail]
> [phone]
>
> Email Delivery Blog: https://wordtothewise.com/blog
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dmarc mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
>