Re: [IETF] DMARC methods in mailman

Viktor Dukhovni <ietf-dane@dukhovni.org> Mon, 26 December 2016 21:20 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-dane@dukhovni.org>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8B691297CC for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Dec 2016 13:20:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 vy3AmLoWTDZa for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Dec 2016 13:20:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mournblade.imrryr.org (mournblade.imrryr.org [38.117.134.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 84AB01297C6 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Dec 2016 13:20:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [IPv6:2604:2000:1382:81a2:4cdf:2a8f:47b0:92b2] (unknown [IPv6:2604:2000:1382:81a2:4cdf:2a8f:47b0:92b2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mournblade.imrryr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7DDF7282D54 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Dec 2016 21:20:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ietf-dane@dukhovni.org)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\))
Subject: Re: [IETF] DMARC methods in mailman
From: Viktor Dukhovni <ietf-dane@dukhovni.org>
In-Reply-To: <20161226205249.rneaenhh5c2dcpz4@thunk.org>
Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2016 16:20:03 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <DB01EF4F-35CB-4908-B05E-2273EE08F69F@dukhovni.org>
References: <m1cKvWY-0000HFC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <EA2191A9-CF62-4984-8275-E0295A207237@gmail.com> <35FC8FF8-A4E6-423F-994C-304B4B3AAF94@dukhovni.org> <20161226144901.f4ym2d6bzz5zxafp@thunk.org> <144FA12E-E647-4F3B-9E5F-8A21213D2678@dukhovni.org> <20161226205249.rneaenhh5c2dcpz4@thunk.org>
To: IETF general list <ietf@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/DDyYdUl-o4Sj4rXV7TOPN3kF4co>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
Reply-To: IETF general list <ietf@ietf.org>
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 26 Dec 2016 21:20:07 -0000

> On Dec 26, 2016, at 3:52 PM, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> wrote:
> 
> By that argument, there's no excuse for the big mailer providers for
> bouncing List mail because of DMARC.  They could just reference the
> List-ID field, and display something like this:
> 
>    <From> via mailing list <list-id header contents>

Many things continue to exist that should be otherwise...

> But they don't do this.  Why, pray tell?

Inertia, lack of imagination, architectures that enforce simple
policy during the SMTP transaction, that don't leave room for more
nuanced handling in the UI.

> Why aren't they doing this
> instead of waiting and hoping ARC will solve the problem?  Maybe
> because users are clueless enough that they would still be getting
> confused?

Someone would need to write the requisite code.  It is easier to
just shift the cost onto the tiny population that uses mailing
lists.

-- 
	Viktor.