IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: DMARC methods in mailman

S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> Wed, 21 December 2016 15:22 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@elandsys.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 132B1129552 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Dec 2016 07:22:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.89
X-Spam-Level:
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: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=opendkim.org header.b=EmjvXuEp; dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=elandsys.com header.b=TiRILAFx
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 7hcua-kyuF9J for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Dec 2016 07:22:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B370E12949D for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Dec 2016 07:22:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com (IDENT:sm@localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id uBLFMK1u029231 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 21 Dec 2016 07:22:24 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1482333746; x=1482420146; bh=U0pP5gIFj9M8V9kEpikLLOVyPWFLXSk2vY0rFBF7hwQ=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=EmjvXuEpd06RMdqSbjWfRO3LvGllmW3oiI0flxaDiiX08P1FGmdg0fLn9BgheQkY7 FpNikMGTpUcjWZst9n7XYTlhBEXP9fEAk44sfLfevT6I3yVlk57API/FKZGNlSBsDo IgKKr+L7S3uwucdLwlAtyXQJ/5nM4C2hBY3FDQvQ=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1482333746; x=1482420146; i=@elandsys.com; bh=U0pP5gIFj9M8V9kEpikLLOVyPWFLXSk2vY0rFBF7hwQ=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=TiRILAFxPxPqgilKVko8mk41GQDyQf5mjLTfq44M3JYRX/LQIp45558MfVPSCZP74 MCV9EGtmx+7C0fjq1rquYKqkLmzqF6EUmEFHK08ycH0sj00phBmNCxAOUnw++Ae1RE ghF2hBhfY67JPKd8C9jL62M40TBSJPmhiIA7lpDg=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20161221065735.0a92e2a0@elandnews.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2016 07:22:13 -0800
To: Philip Homburg <pch-ipv6-ietf-3@u-1.phicoh.com>, ietf@ietf.org
From: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
Subject: Re: DMARC methods in mailman
In-Reply-To: <m1cJfj3-0000CNC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
References: <m1cJIF7-0000DEC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20161221001758.0bde4ac0@elandnews.com> <m1cJfj3-0000CNC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/N-BRhEXsYGfPPhztDQnGH_KfnCA>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Wed, 21 Dec 2016 15:22:28 -0000

Hi Philip,
At 04:10 21-12-2016, Philip Homburg wrote:
>Just to be clear, is this an option that individual subscribers of the mailing
>list can set?

No.  You can view the options available to individual subscribers at 
http://www.elandsys.com/~sm/test.png

>For me, the current IETF lists work fine. My MTA completely ignores DMARC,
>so it would be nice not to be subjected to mangled From headers.

I have not encountered any issue.  I would have opened a ticket if 
there was an issue.

>Are you talking about senders or recipients? The reason yahoo stands out is
>because yahoo seems to be one of the few providers that rejects or bounces
>mail that fails DMARC checks.

I was talking about recipients.

>Or are you saying that at the moment 40% of the subscribers of IETF 
>lists reject
>or otherwise not receive mail from DMARC protected senders?

The 40% was statistics about one IETF mailing list only.  Messages 
from the mailing list to those (40%) subscribers would not be 
rejected as some of the mail providers are not advertising a 
"p=reject".  A number of the mail providers in that 40% will not 
deliver messages from the mailing list to the subscribers as they are 
advertising a "p=quarantine".

Regards,
S. Moonesamy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email