Re: (DMARC) Why mailing lists are only sort of special

Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net> Wed, 16 April 2014 20:01 UTC

Return-Path: <dave@cridland.net>
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 A14121A030E for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 13:01:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.378
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.378 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 p7SnCaRoeuFS for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 13:01:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ob0-x22d.google.com (mail-ob0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::22d]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CDB91A02F3 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 13:01:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ob0-f173.google.com with SMTP id wn1so5471537obc.32 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 13:01:05 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cridland.net; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=dSb2mvHB+ExvIgUfSl7heIhGwwVUOA4TXtXJsA9RUD0=; b=eMPTZKTkp1+9ZxweRoVI/CTS1OwGtfRJJJubCIU5vbq2aKqdGv2YQ3PXqnwuiqMn1d g+hJ82hKC6kEL6fsCV9IxPZ21DTGkPwVHfWnHA8xles+Ph75y7LKhXs09RdJbpw2THuZ B8zQHS2BAkIMYvq1hsqW7zZoiInd6RLsLzoLM=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=dSb2mvHB+ExvIgUfSl7heIhGwwVUOA4TXtXJsA9RUD0=; b=egj1TMnaXab5CjG+jnrmgsVSHwgM1qlBn41DEw/vLSBOe8LvXLJoyyX7/48f9zCVR3 fI9Ri13llRCRnhffRdKHsY03ATh13GDPFrLlxAXvEWDOFLpKDDWBfg5bOiXZzu69fbJP Ado2aPdoZdt35gBRpApjyFl561zX4IPZei226xrojGM8OMVO8a4cibIw9z6yE0P3C9YQ +5kcy3gYRQ/pW/blCUE0vissopEvCu24wuWk0B9KdDsvhdE8f1QSK5iKhksh/FM1tJxN BOO2ckBgxso2fQ6o9ByKK7KZfQP36pfsfpsRdpww8Ml0PbgOZxoMygHmuG75Y6AWVgq9 EE3g==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlZZKV9Q52jIXz4+WpHlhC1JRasoApZ5SjVWCIl0CF9w7QnRjDmjExQBMCyGVArJG+O0khr
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.183.1.34 with SMTP id bd2mr8354666obd.4.1397678465029; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 13:01:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.60.93.6 with HTTP; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 13:01:04 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAL0qLwZUptJVw85T2FjB2HRGoOvcOUHKiQXeadM0QE9BsFVM9w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CE39F90A45FF0C49A1EA229FC9899B0507D45766@USCLES544.agna.amgreetings.com> <20140414214949.32126.qmail@joyce.lan> <CE39F90A45FF0C49A1EA229FC9899B0507D460CB@USCLES544.agna.amgreetings.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1404142150430.32657@joyce.lan> <CAL0qLwbPMm_i0fqNSGQPv=xZaiNASy=icsRNudaNJ_3PNtX3Og@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1404151832460.38826@joyce.lan> <CAL0qLwZUptJVw85T2FjB2HRGoOvcOUHKiQXeadM0QE9BsFVM9w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 21:01:04 +0100
Message-ID: <CAKHUCzxpwS+nR9wRGOzU_83f7XabMr0pwB5x-MHrqM-28r80kw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: (DMARC) Why mailing lists are only sort of special
From: Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net>
To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1134acc26b2aef04f72e60c3
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/4AdlOdXXGRSGbIYGqUCuajMZcww
Cc: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
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 20:01:14 -0000

On 16 April 2014 19:41, Murray S. Kucherawy <superuser@gmail.com> wrote:

> whitelist or a private one.  Are we certain, though, that it's flatly
> impossible to adjust lists in such a way that their traffic could be
> described by these mechanisms?
>
>
If you mean, can we change mailing lists such that they're describable by
DMARC without any change in behaviour, whilst maintaining the essential
premises of mailing lists, then I don't see a mechanism that would allow
this.

If you mean, can we change DMARC (such that existing deployments will have
to change) such that a modified mailing list model (that handles the
existing use cases of mailing lists) would be describable, then I think
that's entirely possible.

Unfortunately, the only option I thought was possibly available isn't
permissible by the specification - therefore, the only solution involves
alterations to the deployed base, which has been ruled impossible for over
a year now.

Dave.