Re: DMARC and ietf.org

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Sat, 13 August 2016 12:03 UTC

Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.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 A292012D595 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 13 Aug 2016 05:03:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 XMnH6HIMYYas for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 13 Aug 2016 05:03:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x22a.google.com (mail-wm0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::22a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C39E212D1A4 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 13 Aug 2016 05:03:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id o80so21231434wme.1 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 13 Aug 2016 05:03:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=QlP5WkbP/CjEOLhut5sFmXEBPp1M7m6wMClNw9uIlg0=; b=cDsjJ92QtfafVbE8H765QOtdPouIZ6V9J+aWpPb399ZF0il9dCjWfprFrITOtgqBap lII9S2d54hK9IS2GA0vDCibBzfDtC4/6JtFYGvRb+ZE8SLx7N9nYsQFr1TpBUlPqzfXj hTmMRLmnJP9ZmzDTEiMlJC5mRwYahfh1BrYeb30f7n9zTporn3hBnpLTfOE0NfNFYcV/ SFlvKiEKobD+JeeV6pDxdKRq8V9sKQFRWjEwvJlW5Qdlpb4176RVWpB6WVEcQPwE/Cl9 EEWqGn/O9hCoTtFyJYEyNEr4d1kDPwJBEk9ep2InYkewcKW5cB5wsPzsQWXogYvzXlEV 79ew==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=QlP5WkbP/CjEOLhut5sFmXEBPp1M7m6wMClNw9uIlg0=; b=jFpTITc/4xp/Jd0DrdTKmiZNSvhDl9cq65D4kWeVpVeSJEwQkCIBpj+UsbyJI3vnqX 0om6mO+DOyFw/ggFV7lowxx0RayO8XCsS45liFTKgGG3EqInJ3PG5SzE8Qs/qVTxRj1d wrPn4cb5t0oBGGTP2FQlu4y0VyMYLmLGbzVvZrFZnu1KDhHKoO4Wcjx90W5fxhRYUM05 jHWO8u3ELHqddjteV5kbnfLCxLiCxpSJX2k8sMaT6ywi7SYKwnkoRbN34XcnE8ucOWO8 VfqcpEmQjSgg5Qji4tsUbHDEhbhNpnlrmHE+rhFcn793E9IWmLjCRRyhgRnEJgbxt6+y Bbtw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AEkoouv/N/fGTLge/dUfFA3t7smQBv1etQ5xl8nhICNevsaPKDnXDfCOopGG+4+fwFyAhYbtb5/Quns1KkNFsQ==
X-Received: by 10.25.210.80 with SMTP id j77mr3950813lfg.139.1471089793138; Sat, 13 Aug 2016 05:03:13 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.25.217.93 with HTTP; Sat, 13 Aug 2016 05:02:32 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20160813023957.5679.qmail@ary.lan>
References: <c87f5578-be42-5a4e-d979-f4166e2f2ef2@gmail.com> <20160813023957.5679.qmail@ary.lan>
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2016 08:02:32 -0400
Message-ID: <CAPt1N1mO0xxfc3SghV1pcNUjOz9yKk-g=bgU+dWrgy2LWcwhBg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: DMARC and ietf.org
To: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11400ee68d977f0539f2c81b
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/UzgImkxbNVQiDvNYKmOXBB_dZb8>
Cc: ietf <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: Sat, 13 Aug 2016 12:03:16 -0000

There are certain senders from whom all the IETF mail I get is marked by
gmail as spam and winds up in the spam folder, because they are using
dmarc.   This hasn't gotten more urgent.   It was urgent when it started.
The complaint is that nothing has changed since then.   This is a classic
case of "best is the enemy of good enough."

On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 10:39 PM, John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:

> >Yes. It's been months and we need to know ASAP ...
>
> ASAP?  Nothing has changed for months.
>
> Google has repeatedly said that they're not going to turn on DMARC
> until ARC is available.
>
> R's,
> John
>
> PS: For my lists, I have a shim that rewrites addresses like
> marissa@yahoo.com to marissa@yahoo.com.dmarc.fail, and sets up
> temporary forwards.  It's simple and works nicely, and since it's
> a shim between the list manager and the MTA, it doesn't require
> surgery on mailman.
>
>