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

mrex@sap.com (Martin Rex) Thu, 24 April 2014 21:35 UTC

Return-Path: <mrex@sap.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 6953C1A03F5 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 14:35:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.952
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.952 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, J_CHICKENPOX_16=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-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 coM81O-C8Nfi for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 14:35:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpde01.sap-ag.de (smtpde01.sap-ag.de [155.56.68.170]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE53F1A03F2 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 14:35:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail05.wdf.sap.corp by smtpde01.sap-ag.de (26) with ESMTP id s3OLZGmH008191 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 24 Apr 2014 23:35:16 +0200 (MEST)
Subject: Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin of a bunch of SMALL community lists
In-Reply-To: <5356F23F.40909@dougbarton.us>
To: Doug Barton <dougb@dougbarton.us>
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 23:35:16 +0200 (CEST)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL125 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Message-Id: <20140424213516.722041ACE0@ld9781.wdf.sap.corp>
From: mrex@sap.com (Martin Rex)
X-SAP: out
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/HC3lyOGSiJdooBjpiqPXDn2IAzo
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: mrex@sap.com
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: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 21:35:30 -0000

Doug Barton wrote:
> 
> What won't help is sitting on the sidelines and whinging that the "DMARC 
> cabal" "doesn't get it" and has to listen to us about how it should 
> conduct their business. Because not only do they clearly not have to do 
> that, they are not doing it.

But that is exactly what happens here, they obviously don't get it at all.

In case you didn't know or realize, what DMARC specifies for p=reject
is actually a real felony crime in Germany (no kidding!), and this may
apply to all over Europe (since the basic idea was spread out all over
europe with a EU directive), unless each individual receipient(!!) has
explicitly opted-in for this to happen.  It should be fairly easy 
to get a cease-and-desist order against European ISPs for blocking
EMail on DMARC p=reject.

It also should stop since it is technically wrong.  It is the tail
trying to wag the dog and some form of company-level bullying.

Get all those stupid MUAs fixed that misrepresent the meaning of rfc5322.From,
and in particular the meaning of rfc5322.From when a rfc5322.Sender is
present in the same message.


-Martin