Re: DMARC methods in mailman (off-topic)

S Moonesamy <> Thu, 22 December 2016 22:51 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4842129571 for <>; Thu, 22 Dec 2016 14:51:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.89
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.89 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-3.1, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.b=xxDXYG7w; dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.b=VlzfNm4e
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rAKcP3QCAqMZ for <>; Thu, 22 Dec 2016 14:51:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D58211279EB for <>; Thu, 22 Dec 2016 14:51:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from (IDENT:sm@localhost []) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id uBMMpJRh007018 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 22 Dec 2016 14:51:24 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple;; s=mail2010; t=1482447086; x=1482533486; bh=RcIYPmKampbpUNk/deMiltv6fDctOEj2hjriyzflqEo=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=xxDXYG7wX429nAd1ijS3vbpoSk+zahhQ98sw2/6BFb4Q36CJ/qJjSK7Whgjp1+1ZK 3p5To/K1LRQ3exXdYRl4u7r+JzCLDJAY2wNxiAnp07RpBypoKVA36eHe4YeLSYkXFJ f+KAYbSQjqAjJ2Zp14XSZ+CdE/e5/l9YwPLisq+Y=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple;; s=mail; t=1482447086; x=1482533486;; bh=RcIYPmKampbpUNk/deMiltv6fDctOEj2hjriyzflqEo=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=VlzfNm4e8FWlWLAfCTX/RNfoIgkqe67S8AGCZBTKiGFRuEg8WBguOEff5RMhiRKMV G4jINuW/SAFJPqKKN3+KRztAylegFUe4BMoiItNY0c91MrHrcfozg4T3ap08Gw58sm YN/lfLgtfvwO3RCNmbvCmybcZ/MFXSB56qtIn8N4=
Message-Id: <>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2016 14:46:28 -0800
To: Hector Santos <>,
From: S Moonesamy <>
Subject: Re: DMARC methods in mailman (off-topic)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2016 22:51:28 -0000

Hi Hector,
At 13:12 22-12-2016, Hector Santos wrote:
>Is that the new modus operandi within the IETF, that extremely weak, 
>poorly engineered Informational Docs can be fast tracked as a 
>"standard" in the IETF?

The way to publish an IETF Proposed Standard or IETF Informational 
document has been the same for over a decade.  I don't think that the 
IETF has changed its way of doing that.

S. Moonesamy