Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC-Compliant Mailing Lists

Douglas Foster <dougfoster.emailstandards@gmail.com> Tue, 12 October 2021 11:42 UTC

Return-Path: <dougfoster.emailstandards@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 743E53A081D for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 04:42:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 Tr4eX7jhPynv for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 04:42:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ot1-x32e.google.com (mail-ot1-x32e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::32e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3AD203A0819 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 04:42:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ot1-x32e.google.com with SMTP id u20-20020a9d7214000000b0054e170300adso25450844otj.13 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 04:42:18 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=/NJsMi56NOgIT2blT66hDFgwx/A5uh1pIFLerBYyMtg=; b=pxpWsXU8D0swSPcvXGlHeqIm+kA3KI8NzlqdUPT8IARNmtVHhOpNz513l/qVugHcxK n9rAPthis7Lr3BFjwt0yRaRFkOaAXOUGidhWokZpXjm1ZuzyZmcqrtaDPkGPEqe12wXP uKGHMyrcElqiMkc9hrXC2i0eSLxCF8AVXazW3kEVxxsq2C1zfXyPogUpsC0H9PUQRXlb 512lA2kRgx0DpmattZ5M9Yktrg4+dCuDFsXCMxXso6w2MiQMuR4XR+Y6EcyOT53YDyrz a4+lhtfOnNVX26f4zsJLcLTsp0VU3q2HihUDZDDJsuwEMGaT9tqOOu82YQSLuGiUl5FJ xEwQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=/NJsMi56NOgIT2blT66hDFgwx/A5uh1pIFLerBYyMtg=; b=H/hr8vw88KQmS447KiNNXRvJU7uRJRzUM9wfk8gp+vEpEhKTJPnMPcrqrHeQFrriTL EQWRvNjiGA7GZr/DKEe3/XvRBarIa0EygXnp+mZUh8ixG7/aivqR8wqvByYMpNR7kF2U CAmRn5x9GHsCkiUeX0pEsx4PwkDdASbCwlXzpUxJHCNYuA6zYR0atl1mZblZqfM8JUn7 fZSlKmz1PWh8xp/Vf+So2yU7t30y3IE3qeUTcE5Pjie6P4qoT8gm2u4y6FJ7koz42lRE tSklplrko4mD1jhbrzqLqIFJEbQKTMHk+jqiRYnT7jALK0fLdyn49d1CvFE1LgWshYOa fXkQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532Gc1x5w1pHz97Y/iNuyrYYlv6HZKxU8CNNV39Q0m81ZQ4kfrsp yBwz+Zqx6/RcsfTy3gFLChoGCuDiXTEU2sqzX20=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy/3flgTNIFpGKgRe+1xOAN5sWen/znrrCThILH56j5SLZS5ec64fedv+DW1jFC19LPGGyAtuHu4hIRpeJBZ88=
X-Received: by 2002:a9d:7283:: with SMTP id t3mr17519130otj.268.1634038937034; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 04:42:17 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20211006233727.24C1429DC897@ary.qy> <56B7A1D4-B683-47D3-8871-2A1F283FA464@wordtothewise.com> <c1e199f1-0c91-9c39-1479-e9ba76af493e@tana.it> <2290129.80B3yH0EHm@zini-1880> <CALaySJJ3Neo6hgEJJ80g-H4vFMJ5Y-Fc=to4R8=sa9-3pg3zgg@mail.gmail.com> <CAH48Zfw81292FOXoSK9xDpG-zo9-r58Dne4Uwy+oi1SFSN_0pA@mail.gmail.com> <B379D307-9394-4FA5-8658-077354756639@kitterman.com> <CAH48ZfzVdMD=R00GJ+hsmYESbzS1wZ+5MvAVoRb=cG4fjBUpaw@mail.gmail.com> <CALaySJJ60Vi-Ex65DwHy0bBiH13vx5qm_hTLoCdVQqEWE=ENdA@mail.gmail.com> <CAH48Zfw4B1nv70x6YG-yOz6=7ECBsfr2uKdSz7_OgOCLrPJ1BQ@mail.gmail.com> <86bd8dab-fefa-fa1c-93c0-fda1749670c4@tana.it>
In-Reply-To: <86bd8dab-fefa-fa1c-93c0-fda1749670c4@tana.it>
From: Douglas Foster <dougfoster.emailstandards@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2021 07:42:06 -0400
Message-ID: <CAH48ZfwaNdUu3561JUfaGsXhLYJg1M_=ndUuKULN50=-YpCeLA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it>
Cc: IETF DMARC WG <dmarc@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000006422aa05ce265656"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/zDLOj_TN7AjuNzQbP8AwL_nOGmA>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC-Compliant Mailing Lists
X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Tue, 12 Oct 2021 11:42:21 -0000

>From a security perspective, Ale's proposal is flawless.   But I don't like
solutions that make the recipient bear most of the costs of the list's
actions.     Unmunging creates a high cost of entry for new domains:

Under a collaboration solution, the subscriber goes to her email support
and says,"I joined list X, and they say that for the best user experience,
we need to configure a whitelist entry to bypass From Filtering on messages
from one SPF-verified SMTP address.    Then I need to give them a response
whether this change has been implemented or not."

Under an unmunging solution, the subscriber conversation is more like this,
"I joined list X, and they say that for the best user experience, we need
to configure an unmunging MTA.   Hope this is not too much trouble.  I hope
you can get this implemented quickly."

Doug Foster