Re: [ietf-822] WSJ/gmail/ML, was a permission to...

[Russ Allbery <[e-mail]>]

Brandon Long <[e-mail]> writes:

> Or, we can hope that enough mailing list providers get together and stay
> the course, break enough mail that Yahoo/AOL feels the pain and loses
> customers or just plain feels the blow-back... but I see now indication
> of that.  Heck, AOL saw the pain that Yahoo users were having and jumped
> right in with their eyes open.

The mailing lists that I run are primarily technical.  If Yahoo and AOL
are deciding to become closed gardens and refusing to allow their users to
participate in broader Internet mailing lists, oh well, that's a business
decision on their part, and their users will have to react accordingly.
It wouldn't be the first time that certain service providers have opted
out of interoperability with the broader Internet and users have had to
decide whether they care or not.  I'm sure it won't be the last.

> What is more important to your mailing lists, some historical
> formatting, or the participation of your members?

Breaking mail addressing is considerably more than "some historical
formatting" and is more important to me than the participation of certain
members who have (through no fault of their own, to be sure) chosen to use
incompetent mail providers.

That said, I'm also happy to take an approach that will let users receive
the mail that they want to read, whether or not that destroys the
usefulness of DMARC.  But I'm not going to rewrite From headers to lie
about the author of the message.  That's a bridge too far for me.

-- 
Russ Allbery ([e-mail])              <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>