IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: DMARC and yahoo

Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Wed, 16 April 2014 11:52 UTC

Return-Path: <randy@psg.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 949FB1A0148 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 04:52:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.172
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.172 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.272] autolearn=ham
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 v5EjBS1T6zFd for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 04:51:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFFF11A0112 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 04:51:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.psg.com.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from <randy@psg.com>) id 1WaONY-0005Os-Pu; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 11:51:49 +0000
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 20:51:46 +0900
Message-ID: <m2ioq95w6l.wl%randy@psg.com>
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Subject: Re: DMARC and yahoo
In-Reply-To: <534E57BC.1060501@cs.tcd.ie>
References: <CAKW6Ri6OUmxGaBOGR2hoWpDOGWsVQ9tQ2Q9ogkT5wzFhFJLBbQ@mail.gmail.com> <534D9C2C.8010606@gmail.com> <20140415214348.GL4456@thunk.org> <1397607352.389753533@f361.i.mail.ru> <534DCFFB.4080102@gmail.com> <20140416012205.GC12078@thunk.org> <24986.1397615002@sandelman.ca> <534E57BC.1060501@cs.tcd.ie>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/V_9Y-Wbl7hNUN7kmpFpCl--sjlM
Cc: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>, 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: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 11:52:00 -0000

> Maybe people who've done that might want to consider whether its
> such a good plan for so many IETF participants to be dependent on
> just one service now that we have a demonstration that s/none/reject/
> in one TXT RR can have such an impact.

try smtp to goog over ipv6.  if you do not have an spf rr and good
reverse dns, high percentage of rejection.  the excuse is that ipv6
is mostly spam so they put up an aggressive barrier.

randy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email