IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Dick Franks <rwfranks@acm.org> Tue, 15 April 2014 01:06 UTC

Return-Path: <rwfranks@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 0536A1A0669 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 18:06:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.277
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.277 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 romgj2H3h5Iy for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 18:06:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yh0-x22b.google.com (mail-yh0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c01::22b]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BFD61A024C for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 18:06:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yh0-f43.google.com with SMTP id b6so8731225yha.2 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 18:06:31 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=5s5qAytMPAOnINr0gRUGHziKQC+2dtYqCPgQqWeFuXE=; b=htlxi5duiYUoD4JW5pXkTUJU1NaQjztGoX0W4oSdeD5H2XmyAiKoncDD+3tTDMm+LB tYFnOnXjIS889+iND/BNxyJmvYfawpcPoc9egHTZnZOpgceHuQq3a6Y9VYcgHWV6Tkgv fm8uuKG/VOo+4u56ze+wcqKwHCoVpCLADUjFpNrSHo+QRa80rYP2gMEqYMEh/b0DqO6V PxcjsZ74tHTzabL36PWCAk6BZg46CITU6jGawOoMUTT1FF85VaHcuhkmRwphP6Tpz3ca hMDPMnilFiYEziSisEmfjPEqOLXeacSpNkHB39S8spKzJJ4G63XiBFkA2uYScURhmUe6 3V2g==
X-Received: by 10.236.116.99 with SMTP id f63mr60783862yhh.10.1397523991783; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 18:06:31 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: rwfranks@gmail.com
Received: by 10.170.129.143 with HTTP; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 18:05:51 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAL0qLwaik1ft+AcACoc+kvKtCRt_gGvM6ov7c2yj_Uwyy3drNw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <53499A5E.9020805@meetinghouse.net> <5349A261.9040500@dcrocker.net> <5349AE35.2000908@meetinghouse.net> <5349BCDA.7080701@gmail.com> <01P6L9JZF5SC00004W@mauve.mrochek.com> <CAKW6Ri5f5KZyJeL7RTG2T000Qd+t61KCofNmG2JZv+nKi94Uug@mail.gmail.com> <534C0078.3070808@meetinghouse.net> <CAKW6Ri6OUmxGaBOGR2hoWpDOGWsVQ9tQ2Q9ogkT5wzFhFJLBbQ@mail.gmail.com> <534C2262.1070507@meetinghouse.net> <CAL0qLwb5p_V3i-NGhKJZBeO0qKHm1xiAq1E3nYkBzVUAXkRPpQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAKW6Ri5HWMaGMa_oLKwq5fzSUzJG=jAL1qojY1i6_tibEAxq8w@mail.gmail.com> <CAL0qLwaik1ft+AcACoc+kvKtCRt_gGvM6ov7c2yj_Uwyy3drNw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Dick Franks <rwfranks@acm.org>
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 02:05:51 +0100
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 8NbSQfgf-_HGFgP2txjw-zmBRyA
Message-ID: <CAKW6Ri5_=GyOQijZMM+mqAoaEQzePGysBy9WVjN9yHO1zf3d2w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin of a bunch of SMALL community lists
To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="20cf3036387d186d0604f70a6993"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/Q10f9ttFd2ODJj9zB2WhtubVv7U
Cc: IETF Discussion <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 01:06:37 -0000

On 14 April 2014 22:17, Murray S. Kucherawy <superuser@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 1:24 PM, Dick Franks <rwfranks@acm.org> wrote:
>
>  2)  Publicly refutes any claim that this is an IETF standardisation
>> effort.
>>
>
> Any such claim is merely outdated and needs correction.
>

 Correct it and the objection goes away.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email