Re: DMARC and yahoo

Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 16 April 2014 12:47 UTC

Return-Path: <ynir.ietf@gmail.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 93C9C1A0156 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 05:47:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 PzTcRMgYTcNO for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 05:47:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x232.google.com (mail-wi0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 237EF1A0170 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 05:47:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wi0-f178.google.com with SMTP id bs8so1304409wib.11 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 05:47:07 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=+nulO1lmWr2UDWm+JXB9JuoEveIrD1BRxujm6Go+xBc=; b=gdfRDJgE0lAKm9zD/ievzTCeQsPjTm0yd2TxrLsBMGd1EFB2zUQnP5XQxiTg9f/nMZ MBxIXL3tKbJNyjAO+ff1z1CDNnktO4pNfA4LodfavvOicKPtUFdhbp/qgTeoZz5BS9qp 4ufOY9LJkKw0JgAjisC8F8sWmkcMX6346ycfUqdZXCbj3+Akx9vlSMV8iDNQycFXbIlf CsU1Uvr25ZHhrs1DJ1XWvpKITV5glXBJS4vCY8XYO0KNHsZCoz1Cu/CzMju73pYY7EAx avItCpAyDvg+9CqBTxXErhlbwRFbu938t3GAkhONKMuKWfVqmtM2a9chvd+Ll7y1IWMv kV5Q==
X-Received: by 10.180.24.72 with SMTP id s8mr19257253wif.20.1397652426013; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 05:47:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [172.24.248.99] (dyn32-131.checkpoint.com. [194.29.32.131]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id lh6sm34219755wjb.27.2014.04.16.05.47.04 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 16 Apr 2014 05:47:04 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\))
Subject: Re: DMARC and yahoo
From: Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <534E57BC.1060501@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 15:46:59 +0300
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <A79E1B55-9390-4587-BFE5-9D7DE4C41D3D@gmail.com>
References: <CAKW6Ri6OUmxGaBOGR2hoWpDOGWsVQ9tQ2Q9ogkT5wzFhFJLBbQ@mail.gmail.com> <534D9C2C.8010606@gmail.com> <20140415214348.GL4456@thunk.org> <1397607352.389753533@f361.i.mail.ru> <534DCFFB.4080102@gmail.com> <20140416012205.GC12078@thunk.org> <24986.1397615002@sandelman.ca> <534E57BC.1060501@cs.tcd.ie>
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/7V7Rcljl9MmPH7JraM1l_0qRvLg
Cc: IETF-Discussion <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 12:47:30 -0000

On Apr 16, 2014, at 1:13 PM, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> wrote:

> 
> This is probably obvious, but had gmail.com done what yahoo.com
> has done, that could I guess have a pretty significant impact on
> the IETF getting stuff done for a while since a lot of folks in
> the last few years seem to have migrated their IETF mail to
> gmail.com as a reasonable way to get around corporate this-and-that
> issues.

I’m one of those folks. It was mostly over spam filtering rejecting posts that it shouldn’t, especially messages from the lists that seemed to be coming from my email address. And rejected messages lead to unsubscribing. I got fed up with re-enabling my subscription every week or so. 

> Maybe people who've done that might want to consider whether its
> such a good plan for so many IETF participants to be dependent on
> just one service now that we have a demonstration that s/none/reject/
> in one TXT RR can have such an impact.

I considered this, so I first tried another provider (neither Yahoo! nor GMail). It turned out to be blocked from posting to @irtf.org mailing lists. I waited a week for this to sort itself out, but that didn’t happen. So I thought I’d complain/open a ticket/something. I searched their site and couldn’t find a support email address. The troubleshooting flowchart ended with a phone number. I spent 20 minutes on hold and then 10 more with the firstest or first-line support (“yes, I’m sure I have an account.  Yes, I’m logged in. Yes, I’m sure the other SMTP server is up”). He gave me the number for the second line of support. In the US. So I gave up, especially since their IMAP didn’t work with my client.

It looks like there’s a lot of providers out there, but there’s not that many who work correctly.  So I ended up with a GMail account like many others.

Yoav