IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Will mailing lists survive DMARC?

Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se> Tue, 29 April 2014 11:28 UTC

Return-Path: <paf@frobbit.se>
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 DFCCF1A0840 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 04:28:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 T9bmJxNN1hA2 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 04:28:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.frobbit.se (mail.frobbit.se [IPv6:2a02:80:3ffe::176]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7616D1A082F for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 04:28:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:2a01:3f0:1::8dff:f286:505f:5921] (unknown [IPv6:2a01:3f0:1:0:8dff:f286:505f:5921]) by mail.frobbit.se (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 94874205B8; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 13:28:38 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_25E861EE-ACE9-4B4E-BA26-032C84A33ED9"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha1"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\))
Subject: Re: Will mailing lists survive DMARC?
From: Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1404291317510.29282@uplift.swm.pp.se>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 13:28:38 +0200
Message-Id: <0B08F94B-FD02-462F-9E74-E6CE7F85ECC9@frobbit.se>
References: <535F88C3.4060002@tana.it> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1404291317510.29282@uplift.swm.pp.se>
To: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/XwbMV5C38irtD8dm_bQ7A3ZSkQs
Cc: ietf <ietf@ietf.org>, Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it>
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, 29 Apr 2014 11:28:42 -0000

On 29 apr 2014, at 13:22, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> wrote:

> On the other hand, this will primarily cause direct problems to users/customers of the organisations that decide to do "p=reject" as their participation in mailing lists will be crippled.

As Mikael says, this is a problem for people in those organisations that choose to have such filter policy together with the de-facto functionality of mailing lists out there.

I ask myself as well what the problem is.

If there was collateral damage on third parties, that would for me have been a different thing. As far as I see here, there is not. The damage is on the people that have chosen to have such policy (or customers of them).

If I have completely misunderstood the situation, my apologies and I'll go back and re-read the flood of email on the topic... :-)

   Patrik

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email