IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: IETF Mailing Lists and DMARC

"John R Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Wed, 02 November 2016 17:22 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.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 CAB1412968B for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Nov 2016 10:22:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=ABl70vhM; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=R5nUihVJ
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 OcIGXRDQhE1w for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Nov 2016 10:22:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from miucha.iecc.com (abusenet-1-pt.tunnel.tserv4.nyc4.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f06:1126::2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B85521296CC for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Nov 2016 10:22:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 15086 invoked from network); 2 Nov 2016 17:22:08 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=3aec.581a20c0.k1611; bh=K+Qb4xpgUJq5nJNopViE3inndIncZZ35l0j5MCkC+go=; b=ABl70vhMToyx59ljSprWNkg+7E+PJMS+Sr23F5zXM1GJNYErLHq7NRF3UpsEaoeWZvJg/UHeuLfl0BdN+h83ZezfY5fqEZocZteObcWuSzn5eonb7UhV9AYUBYYPz/JW9Qh4ow59sjcwpAptXaRx3HA86Gzbmvnt/FqVncHNjwKYxCQ/xuea72gjo5h5i3HATT9KVT2hrbSIFpWZi5MjpEiz3xFx5UoSSYR2+Ryb0GwAxDlwGms3K376P2mKeqjs
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=3aec.581a20c0.k1611; bh=K+Qb4xpgUJq5nJNopViE3inndIncZZ35l0j5MCkC+go=; b=R5nUihVJbw9iAc7NtpxeB+jJ8QTHGNzXvFaVS5FWE3izrokQS6HVI6CrtvQdMfSWyOlgEKIpS6dS4t5GQGjhpC+cFAc3J4o8+yzkIat3epSb+aQyGBQ3F+RbXSVK4ipwG31IT3S5TkQ50vTHB26la7sSlGgyQbpPyH3FtYz+XdDt/r+dhTJDSAmm0mVmu60ICIZ4tAf/hAlH5YjYtnTt9rLXUqD7UpXtl0Nx2Pmz8Y6NEZxJae9YzcOt2gJrkquG
Received: from localhost ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.0/X.509/SHA1) via TCP6; 02 Nov 2016 17:22:08 -0000
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2016 13:22:07 -0400
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.2.11.1611021320380.39341@ary.qy>
From: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: "MH Michael Hammer (5304)" <MHammer@ag.com>
Subject: RE: IETF Mailing Lists and DMARC
In-Reply-To: <CE39F90A45FF0C49A1EA229FC9899B0526789ED8@USCLES544.agna.amgreetings.com>
References: <CAPt1N1k1wg9mbN-guuarFP0NvX7v-suOY-bP=TDEOCVhK-epmg@mail.gmail.com> <20161102165600.67029.qmail@ary.lan> <CE39F90A45FF0C49A1EA229FC9899B0526789ED8@USCLES544.agna.amgreetings.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (OSX 23 2013-08-11)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/TLkYrsJg68FTLgGwyuTRU4LmJWE>
Cc: "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
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, 02 Nov 2016 17:22:10 -0000

>> there's an ARC addon for Mailman and we use that, the DMARC damage
>> should drop considerably, without us having to change the way we use our
>> lists.

> It's not clear to me that this is true John. DMARC Validators will need to take ARC into consideration and we don't know what adoption will look like other than a handful of players at this point.

I certainly don't think that ARC will make all the problems go away, but 
it should mostly fix the problems at Gmail and Yahoo which are a large 
fraction of the mail traffic.

For smaller sites, if they do anything with DMARC at all, they'll still 
need to whitelist mailing lists, which of course they could do now.

R's,
John

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email