Re: DMARC and yahoo

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Mon, 21 April 2014 16:36 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.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 927881A0010 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Apr 2014 09:36:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.542
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.542 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779] 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 l4xTmEbCp3ki for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Apr 2014 09:36:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from miucha.iecc.com (abusenet-1-pt.tunnel.tserv4.nyc4.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f06:1126::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F98B1A0181 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 21 Apr 2014 09:36:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 20120 invoked from network); 21 Apr 2014 16:36:44 -0000
Received: from miucha.iecc.com (64.57.183.18) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 21 Apr 2014 16:36:44 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=71ef.5355491c.k1404; i=johnl@user.iecc.com; bh=HZ94e2M/e7rTz/Vpy3kG33TL7eEcI4vRm+IHi9f5K/c=; b=XAjCBDKEVjYORSAJ6uAz3mUqFclB373nCrtU7MTwUBAZnsC++1EhvXe1e5JEuKv7zuYHl7NkgxJSmvESobfKijga6S4jvnRYK5jtG+mXxaahIxSfIhIpTh/mzREnSMSz9wy0K80EuZ0aS+MAU1Uac3ke7M6uStJ79XXNTTc0nrTQlWzn8vRfDvZnycG1MsnLkCjAK+GV6dUlv2STHE0JMJxRC2PvTcFKP90aWHVB0SDDlq60C7bix1eAlU2fyM/b
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=71ef.5355491c.k1404; olt=johnl@user.iecc.com; bh=HZ94e2M/e7rTz/Vpy3kG33TL7eEcI4vRm+IHi9f5K/c=; b=F449tGw3SOdn0sDsPO4iBf7Z7Z/jSlwI5dqKcRLpu59P6GoOiHt6BSzrKza+RJxZZyzCSoBNT8zQeUElZSRQoylF71Y0sMjEhF2g7RrJhbCNO7+Y+Dv+aZwUcCHCdWWjhi8rvlLtMwMKo4Lm//prjH8MMBSqdEZsdzrVNq5tBaUEe0M6s9G/kCRmcGtnby+AM3i5wbZoMxgiLsEeU5tBLBwS3ovRUrCtQTMBPhL8T70a6Sk1rxASRdmPZmwO7fJk
Date: 21 Apr 2014 16:36:21 -0000
Message-ID: <20140421163621.29166.qmail@joyce.lan>
From: "John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com>
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: DMARC and yahoo
In-Reply-To: <DF48768A-90D8-4634-A5E0-9C343A849F5A@gmail.com>
Organization:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/GSwgP-TfLF_bzh6fvijA6g3KO-U
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, 21 Apr 2014 16:36:56 -0000

>Right. As a mailing list provider, we have a way to make our lists work:
>
> From: IETF mailing list on behalf of Christian Huitema <ietf@ietf.org>

It is certainly possible to create mailing-list-like things that avoid
the damage from DMARC.  The question remains why it is our job to
screw up our systems to fix their problems.  They could fix it if they
wanted, e.g., by arranging to whitelist mail sources that don't match
DMARC's authentication model but send mail people want.  This is not
just mailing lists, of course.

I subscribe to a few lists that put the list's address on the From:
line, due I think to administrative confusion, not anything
deliberate, and it is much worse than normal list mail.  When I look
at normal list mail in my inbox, I pick out the ones from people I
know first.  On the lists where it's all the same, I tend to look at
the subject and if it's not obviously interesting, dump the whole
thread.

R's,
John