What I've been wondering about the DMARC problem

Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com> Tue, 15 April 2014 04:02 UTC

Return-Path: <abdussalambaryun@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 706E31A0198 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 21:02:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 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, HTML_MESSAGE=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 MPPmhX2xZNvj for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 21:02:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yh0-x22e.google.com (mail-yh0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c01::22e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55B7B1A0491 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 21:02:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yh0-f46.google.com with SMTP id b6so8839935yha.5 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 21:02:20 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=XlAF+/ziouawaCF4MAKOAYZZjVir+JrBL8Ws/2oUa/Y=; b=aEXwJd/8zXCjX6PKhAQKajcg3rIJKpEr9nCnT8l7XCwDC3qDHEQZfYyelzOPRvQkHa IK6s4u9cgxtVwERVwIPLlfVw80wW4OPYsImoVakaCqCFRhMF+VNfUGdbUS2VQCL1yv7w C68qLOBe2R431a8iomtmpWTPPk2yoH3u5pwbe8SblvO6rNoBxGXqrDrGRmqGGszo7sHI Mo/kBOdCXt1At91GusiWoD5UsyIbijpjFXBdYABm3VTrt1ztEoist0mMuagyyGFSZvkg IfGasaDoYJMv8drshDbzxpMcTfMkfdeciFQwvPSPiMqEd92HNeZNGp4K6PvyDxoVASNv +jGw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.236.13.46 with SMTP id a34mr64405397yha.28.1397534540360; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 21:02:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.170.87.135 with HTTP; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 21:02:20 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <534C8F2B.9060903@gmail.com>
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> <CAKW6Ri6OUmxGaBOGR2hoWpDOGWsVQ9tQ2Q9ogkT5wzFhFJLBbQ@mail.gmail.com> <534C2262.1070507@meetinghouse.net> <CAL0qLwb5p_V3i-NGhKJZBeO0qKHm1xiAq1E3nYkBzVUAXkRPpQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAKW6Ri5HWMaGMa_oLKwq5fzSUzJG=jAL1qojY1i6_tibEAxq8w@mail.gmail.com> <CAL0qLwaik1ft+AcACoc+kvKtCRt_gGvM6ov7c2yj_Uwyy3drNw@mail.gmail.com> <CAKW6Ri5_=GyOQijZMM+mqAoaEQzePGysBy9WVjN9yHO1zf3d2w@mail.gmail.com> <534C8F2B.9060903@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 05:02:20 +0100
Message-ID: <CADnDZ8-DWU3ZE_WZO3vwBWvYtNZacdN9mDUof0jmfu2uKZ2poQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: What I've been wondering about the DMARC problem
From: Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c3dc3ad6f32c04f70cdd30
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/ELnsHWl2-EsYyKJDFc5lpsu_e-4
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: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 04:02:27 -0000

The standard procedure in many companies is business scoped, so they
identify important business users and the business returns/damages. Most
important users are not IT experts, and use email for personal exchange. Yahoo
has signed an agreement with users to protect its information system, so
all seem to follow that, and all users are free to stop using services or
not.

AB

On Tuesday, April 15, 2014, Brian E Carpenter wrote:

> I thought that standard operating procedure in the IT industry
> was: if you roll something out and it causes serious breakage to
> some of your users, you roll it back as soon as possible.
>
> Why hasn't Yahoo rolled back its 'reject' policy by now?
>
> Regards
>    Brian
>
>