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

[Alessandro Vesely <[e-mail]>]

On Sun 09/Apr/2023 20:33:54 +0200 Barry Leiba wrote:
> 
> There is an alternative, though: we can acknowledge that because of how those 
> deploying DMARC view their needs over interoperability, DMARC is not 
> appropriate as an IETF standard, and we abandon the effort to make it Proposed 
> Standard.


That sounds perfectly reasonable.  If we actually /propose/ a standard, we can 
drop the slippery concept of general purpose domains and seek to open the era 
of authenticated email for every one.


> I see that as the only way forward if we cannot address the damage that 
> improperly deployed DMARC policies do to mailing lists.


The correct way to address that is to propose that mailing lists too 
authenticate their posts, so that subscribing to a mailing list doesn't entail 
a security risk.  Let ARC prove their correct filtering and encourage receivers 
to override DMARC failures in MLs' streams, after subscription confirmation.


Best
Ale
--