Re: [IETF] DMARC methods in mailman

[tom p. <[e-mail]>]

---- Original Message -----
From: "Viktor Dukhovni" <[e-mail]>
To: "IETF general list" <[e-mail]>
Sent: Saturday, December 24, 2016 6:45 PM

> Sure, but, ultimately, what's the goal of this discussion?  Presumably
> some workable configuration of the list managers that serves the needs
> of IETF list members (possibly with some adjustment of how
participants
> interact with the lists).
>
> So, if this discussion is to get anywhere, there needs to emerge a
> consensus on the usability requirements for the lists.  At least
> the following need to be understood:
>
>    1. Must WG lists add [WG] subject tags?  Or can this be left to
>       subscriber etiquette?
>
>    2. Are message footers are a requirement?
>
>    3. Is modification of the "From" header acceptable?
>
> Discussion of whether to exclude subscribers from domains with
> DMARC policy are not necessary if some acceptable combination
> of the choices in 1, 2, 3 (or perhaps other options I left out)
> works with DMARC and retains list usability.
>
> As I mentioned before, for me, the most usable option is avoiding
> message modification of any kind, which leaves the origin DKIM
> signature valid.  I've not seen anyone comment on whether that's
> workable for IETF WG lists (it works well enough for *this* list).

The most attractive mail lists for me are ones that always modify
messages, namely removing the mountain of HTML and leaving just the
text/plain.  I wish that all WG Chairs exercised that option.  Only
today, on another list, I saw a well-respected contributor say
"Oh, how I hate HTML emails!"
Yes.

I note too that e-mails in unusual dialects appear to get footers added
in text/plain, to identify which list they are on.

I believe that this does not invalid the origin DKIM signature, so I see
the criterion as always modifying messages but not in a way that
invalids DKIM signatures.

Tom Petch

> Viktor.
>