Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin of a bunch of SMALL community lists

Dick Franks <rwfranks@acm.org> Mon, 14 April 2014 17:42 UTC

Return-Path: <rwfranks@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 8E4311A069E for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 10:42:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.423
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.423 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, 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 5hk-fKNETG4X for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 10:41:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yh0-x22b.google.com (mail-yh0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c01::22b]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 958AD1A01F8 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 10:41:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yh0-f43.google.com with SMTP id b6so8381213yha.30 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 10:41:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=vh0QTjl87YgntcfRO8wsYSpgARFTz7oN+f9uM63Jh34=; b=aEtxjUC5FQ7QopZuYk6MysJKab1nhKFAgroq5PgjPTDmy7k7W2M3jsS7Wa6SaKoKp9 oHU5hidRlYO2+Z0OcTErA2ZQ5v7G92+xWhq85+jgpUf+XrMsMdAi2YnDS9/zbwL8RG+d X1ciiZD29H4dBeXI+yJ3LhYccecbXvtR6wGecdJezLOvCyO8EskWwVj549pGyB5i0fzg 0lNJem+VTzsjZfCnhagMJyZz6JXaOExQa55VX9WKI/8VNHfvWaMGLSQvAUNKZ89O1flx oQ5tmNi1G+C48EMGvvrkl+l9TbgPP5xnS3q17CSSgW+RYNMWqcdaPnlLCGpoLehix6yV 1aLQ==
X-Received: by 10.236.157.167 with SMTP id o27mr4709128yhk.127.1397497314018; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 10:41:54 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: rwfranks@gmail.com
Received: by 10.170.129.143 with HTTP; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 10:41:13 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <534C0078.3070808@meetinghouse.net>
References: <53499A5E.9020805@meetinghouse.net> <5349A261.9040500@dcrocker.net> <5349AE35.2000908@meetinghouse.net> <5349BCDA.7080701@gmail.com> <01P6L9JZF5SC00004W@mauve.mrochek.com> <CAKW6Ri5f5KZyJeL7RTG2T000Qd+t61KCofNmG2JZv+nKi94Uug@mail.gmail.com> <534C0078.3070808@meetinghouse.net>
From: Dick Franks <rwfranks@acm.org>
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2014 18:41:13 +0100
X-Google-Sender-Auth: IXx07FvPvuMbWv5nGUKe136lQi0
Message-ID: <CAKW6Ri6OUmxGaBOGR2hoWpDOGWsVQ9tQ2Q9ogkT5wzFhFJLBbQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin of a bunch of SMALL community lists
To: Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf303f676cfa0c3804f7043229
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/CTLjv-r8Ym82BFkbSVOKX2Qmhh4
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: Mon, 14 Apr 2014 17:42:00 -0000

On 14 April 2014 16:36, Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> wrote:

> Dick Franks wrote:
>
>
>> On 13 April 2014 00:35, <ned+ietf@mauve.mrochek.com <mailto:
>> ned+ietf@mauve.mrochek.com>> wrote:
>> [snip]
>>
>>    It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
>>    material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
>>
>> An implementation based on I-D reference material is therefore no better
>> than "work in progress".
>>
>> The blame for this debacle lies squarely with Yahoo, and its inadequate
>> engineering change management.
>>
>>
> That's all in the fine print.


Indeed, but with blame so firmly attached, list operators need not be too
concerned about inconveniencing Yahoo customers by rejecting posts. Those
most affected will doubtless vote with their metaphorical feet.




> - allowing someone to represent something as an IETF standard carries a
> risk to IETF's standing, effectiveness, and credibility as the Internet's
> standards body (ISO tends to get very upset if someone claims to be ISO9000
> certified, but isn't; Xerox sends lawyers after competitors who refer to
> their copiers as "xerox machines")
>

Are you suggesting that IETF brings an action for trademark infringement?

Against whom?


A more pragmatic, less expensive, and publicly visible expression of IETF
displeasure might be to expunge all versions of the offending I-D from IETF
document store and refuse to publish any subsequent version until the
unwarranted claims made for it are retracted.

To be effective, that needs to be done now, while the iron is still hot;
not after the usual 3-month email debate about the diplomatic niceties.