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

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Wed, 16 April 2014 01:38 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F0661A0025 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Apr 2014 18:38:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 2.142
X-Spam-Level: **
X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.142 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, J_CHICKENPOX_16=0.6, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779] autolearn=no
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 tIWa8cGceA8c for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Apr 2014 18:38:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from miucha.iecc.com (abusenet-1-pt.tunnel.tserv4.nyc4.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f06:1126::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8E191A0010 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Apr 2014 18:38:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 19609 invoked from network); 16 Apr 2014 01:38:32 -0000
Received: from miucha.iecc.com (64.57.183.18) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 16 Apr 2014 01:38:32 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=9a10.534ddf17.k1404; i=johnl@user.iecc.com; bh=5xOZmgvp2+UcI7FuuTjsfQw9hwiJaPRGQrSHfDWA04o=; b=UeRbY9snhjMLGYRUqjbrHM0Kni6wnExkCZE2sh5DqRVyVI0PeLl5m6og2bAjc8qVwmgmZDfEKlhRO5+4EPVUZ+84ei7iZdYq+BEoL6XqzcnHsCjdEEU1FSiTj2JRBnS6z13gsO14qDs20h9G0sAAQqdXiwGuixqnsdEKlL2b7OWoxPSmKoLVXCxDpqsDLsAYjTLFUfZk+tHvKPCou8YFbNZgUs+EibludDP0dehomiwihfrOsHpbZFYT+68lZ8it
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=9a10.534ddf17.k1404; olt=johnl@user.iecc.com; bh=5xOZmgvp2+UcI7FuuTjsfQw9hwiJaPRGQrSHfDWA04o=; b=QaB3hOmucNjTCxugsA57p2E7F1dJ1q/fSuOTabtsd6nGN/7ymIZcBaeekXAb3r8zY/fb5gTLVisNblZgTQuX6H5+5tsYjYD2Kyv18z/J30Jvp0Zhg/L08HBOc9fntGpcx+yyhyy8V7171IYCHnFJhGj0kTFD2sQodSWEmPuJxVSGsW7MPbsxcmUsD0VsADtvSR4ARq9xfwr82DwLtQfvx3qtVkk6yldnoaVL0ks2n+owHezX3Jg1JHfnEiw+YGF9
Date: 16 Apr 2014 01:38:09 -0000
Message-ID: <20140416013809.39439.qmail@joyce.lan>
From: "John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com>
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: DMARC: perspectives from a listadmin of large open-source lists
In-Reply-To: <534DBA0F.2050507@gmail.com>
Organization:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/2GsA7XhYBRjNElPIwgK66eK01NE
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 01:38:41 -0000

>> (If the originating domain is expressly *not* OK with the
>> redistribution, the mailing list should bounce the message back to the
>> author saying as much.)
>
>Isn't that exactly what p=reject implies? If so, the logical behaviour
>for all list software would be to check the DMARC record for the
>originating domain of each message, and bounce it if p=reject.

That's certainly been mentioned a lot of times and is certainly consistent
with what p=reject says it means.


The problem is pragmatic: there are a lot of people who use Yahoo's
mail, very few of them understand the technology very well, and they'd
see this as just another baffling thing that happens on their
computers.  I would like to encourage all of the Yahoo users on my
lists to find a better provider, but that will take years.  In the
meantime, the church has a lot of meetings to organize.  It's a market
power problem, not a technical problem.

R's,
John