Re: DMARC: perspectives from a listadmin of large open-source lists

S Moonesamy <> Tue, 15 April 2014 19:25 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 403B21A0186 for <>; Tue, 15 Apr 2014 12:25:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.272
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.272 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.272] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QOriUgU0A5hj for <>; Tue, 15 Apr 2014 12:25:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58BEE1A068D for <>; Tue, 15 Apr 2014 12:25:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([]) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s3FJP8L2016390 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 15 Apr 2014 12:25:18 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple;; s=mail2010; t=1397589920; bh=oxRtuTyHPey/W+zMzj7pwrkGJKL+weGQFHnQeROHKwg=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=YuDa9nK3fQhjpBWTXTxGEx2KZ7Goe5UKbkma4g9EiTVdNCSFVo2pc2AM6FxJw5MaZ L5+TCPMvBDnmpOJeF+6fI1b3f8sy4Z5CzY3ERDCjqDFJW38KVSPb/iuaZhhFUWOPdQ Kqc038QNdESYm/7/yQoHAB781nBfdl/UKLP5FTTk=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple;; s=mail; t=1397589920;; bh=oxRtuTyHPey/W+zMzj7pwrkGJKL+weGQFHnQeROHKwg=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=41hK76YwWSn+Q94Nu+sxnQtgef+ST6O+xxLYvriFS9WDYbylTcalqrtQwGkCDPnRZ KqYZvCg/45uX/StIqBxPJqhDuyBWnyBHfP5PTRB4bdlwJ9NpbdXODIGt+n7DLQhxmh jK6nIpSHhwAQv1hN2+Had4z2rlwGmO2SfyULQd0s=
Message-Id: <>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 12:23:44 -0700
To: Dave Cridland <>
From: S Moonesamy <>
Subject: Re: DMARC: perspectives from a listadmin of large open-source lists
In-Reply-To: <CAKHUCzxqrLkAjFgghZnf+SDAFYH_YMS6WR4r9jOm4yErXEFLXQ@mail.g>
References: <20140414024956.26078.qmail@joyce.lan> <> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1404132327560.26258@joyce.lan> <> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1404132346420.26386@joyce.lan> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 19:25:38 -0000

Hi Dave,
At 00:42 15-04-2014, Dave Cridland wrote:
>Given the expense and difficulty of IETF participation for smaller 
>organisations and individuals, it's hard for them to club together 
>and stand up to the 8000lb gorillas.

The above is an obvious problem or difficult situation that people do 
not want to talk about.

Publication in the IETF Stream usually entails giving up change 
control.  Sometimes that does not work out well; see RFC 6109.  The 
process is tedious.  It does not have to be like that if people make 
room for agreement.  In simple terms, people can discuss about X for 
the next three years or there can be a short discussion and a 
solution within the next three months.

The summary of the DMARC BoF is at 
According to that message there was agreement for the IETF to take on 
the DMARC base specification.

S. Moonesamy