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

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Tue, 15 April 2014 23:00 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@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 00BB01A0027 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Apr 2014 16:00:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.4
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 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, J_CHICKENPOX_16=0.6, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 Bw6pr-i3AIKi for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Apr 2014 16:00:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pa0-x236.google.com (mail-pa0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::236]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0909B1A0023 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Apr 2014 16:00:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pa0-f54.google.com with SMTP id lf10so10119865pab.41 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Apr 2014 16:00:31 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=hCTGZ3ply7hNEG6eEa0ezSa6fHqcmErjxMStoBpqTvg=; b=EjrvCymGhuhhpVS5QYBO0C+QDPNyU2giC0vxjf018r112cTrmMHPllG+YgQj1SlQ1c gHDjS/opACKu6j/SFKZFN6Aw59UM+L4fIadGQmbbCqXO5safKnF4cglpgSyfwmghygZ+ abqGQngT1tHFsjKN3WhUs763o6Nbd4KgGd9oEWbdVBfd5Ifk/MVeGmLE6CueSexiTYaS YDl9W1UJGhUEGtE21IisZj5OS8oKw3T/smOP2uXpAjxDQveWy5c0KOKO4T3Ut2qdUdyv MqhdeKuJdPC1noGHmEip6ZtfIJX0mRGE+wjPWFAUUxURIEb2Rw9UFIus4tnpk56TKevM D3GA==
X-Received: by 10.68.201.97 with SMTP id jz1mr4885065pbc.26.1397602831125; Tue, 15 Apr 2014 16:00:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [172.24.22.37] (wireless-nat-20.auckland.ac.nz. [130.216.30.131]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id y4sm42644052pbk.76.2014.04.15.16.00.28 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 15 Apr 2014 16:00:30 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <534DBA0F.2050507@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 11:00:31 +1200
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>
Subject: Re: DMARC: perspectives from a listadmin of large open-source lists
References: <20140414024956.26078.qmail@joyce.lan> <534B524F.4050206@dcrocker.net> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1404132327560.26258@joyce.lan> <E0B7196CB2603B80BBEC21AF@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1404132346420.26386@joyce.lan> <1EBDF5239EEE5202D3837D25@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <534B9760.90301@dougbarton.us> <6C80882F19CCEDFE15E987CA@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <534BEF75.5060804@bbiw.net> <534DB093.5020507@qti.qualcomm.com>
In-Reply-To: <534DB093.5020507@qti.qualcomm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/JGtj8oHO2CoCHW6-ZWcsVT_gtiY
Cc: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>, Dave Crocker <dcrocker@bbiw.net>, 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 23:00:35 -0000

Pete,

On 16/04/2014 10:20, Pete Resnick wrote:
...

> (If the originating domain is expressly *not* OK with the
> redistribution, the mailing list should bounce the message back to the
> author saying as much.)

Isn't that exactly what p=reject implies? If so, the logical behaviour
for all list software would be to check the DMARC record for the
originating domain of each message, and bounce it if p=reject.

   Brian