Re: DMARC: perspectives from a listadmin of large open-source lists

Dave Cridland <> Mon, 14 April 2014 21:09 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BC271A0493 for <>; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 14:09:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.022
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.022 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id D3IqMjzj_FDD for <>; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 14:08:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::232]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F73B1A0397 for <>; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 14:08:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id wp18so9626954obc.23 for <>; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 14:08:55 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=u4AzSgFbsMIgsp9b0/sSIWRceHANvhE4KSpKxat4owE=; b=FDR76YgHHEpILoPakN8EYMs6GFjjSJmT7TkF2wvTacOqnAWCg8w0gSXqGYe7skmoTC RG8esleMEnnys3rzQZaMwjNaFmedDHqTxSAnuRTSWKLHSO9d2aQL/JFiZVEExpEwB/jc KWrFaPxt6B+Ee2TRtzDKcB52MQ3SUcGEeFEAY=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=u4AzSgFbsMIgsp9b0/sSIWRceHANvhE4KSpKxat4owE=; b=MY+WOIjLIESo37VcLSlN7K46EwoXXIooZusY/hXjttZcAvRSNsKOB41PNpZoE80swU HIKcLwTePKzCPzHHcX+WU4aD6LvBmdJ34KP0hI+WXzMOpguAtdFWLU7ihYtDN+KawYua M7AiS9nrTbjDHweLC0QrTlhgss8ok6EpArfYnIS5QjyXLjIGD9rgGQ9Re897JS9N+YOc qk+7SRHDa3L76dAiPi6kDxStU81uO+w1GB980HAslxuERd61uqg35ieNv5fvfqp+Gk/m zm9DtIgqc04qGzWNdOh5dYlU71kj1FcH4VsX5+TA9Zs362KEWTOqnujmOdKaezTKGXNq IeOw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnCXQ+VDIyMcQiVEo5Y6X1sO1xUy24aEDIiJH+MI9u1A7acOcG74Tzlrz4kUe9ay37ob9jP
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by with SMTP id p9mr35910488obi.37.1397509735584; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 14:08:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with HTTP; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 14:08:55 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <20140414024956.26078.qmail@joyce.lan> <> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1404132327560.26258@joyce.lan> <> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1404132346420.26386@joyce.lan> <> <> <> <>
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2014 22:08:55 +0100
Message-ID: <>
Subject: Re: DMARC: perspectives from a listadmin of large open-source lists
From: Dave Cridland <>
To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b5d58b45c2cfd04f7071729
Cc: ietf <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2014 21:09:02 -0000

On 14 April 2014 18:26, Murray S. Kucherawy <> wrote:

> I mentioned in another thread that the DMARC people did come to the IETF
> to ask for a working group to complete development of the work on the
> standards track.  This request was denied on the grounds that DMARC was
> essentially already done, and thus the IETF had nothing engineering-wise to
> contribute.  There were also too few people that were not already DMARC
> proponents that would commit to working on it.
The DMARC folk came to the IETF to have a rubber stamp put on their work,
and pretty explicitly stated that no substantive changes were acceptable,
and that change control would de-facto remains with the DMARC consortium.

So nobody who wasn't already "in the club" was really invited.

Feel free to go review the quite extensive discussion almost exactly a year
ago, but it includes suggestions that the DMARC group really only wanted
the IETF to polish the document's text a bit, but that this was rejected.

So no, I dispute very heavily that the DMARC people ever came to the IETF
to "complete development of the work"; there were explicit statements at
the time that they came to have the document wordsmithed without changing
the protocol at all.

The discussion (that I read at the time; there may be more) is all in the
apps-discuss archives.