RE: DMARC and yahoo

<l.wood@surrey.ac.uk> Thu, 17 April 2014 01:39 UTC

Return-Path: <l.wood@surrey.ac.uk>
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 734631A03AC for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 18:39:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=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 gzGkDg8hyqoG for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 18:39:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail1.bemta5.messagelabs.com (mail1.bemta5.messagelabs.com [195.245.231.137]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5BAC1A03A9 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 18:39:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [195.245.231.67:5338] by server-1.bemta-5.messagelabs.com id E0/ED-10259-7D03F435; Thu, 17 Apr 2014 01:39:35 +0000
X-Env-Sender: l.wood@surrey.ac.uk
X-Msg-Ref: server-15.tower-82.messagelabs.com!1397698775!13765773!1
X-Originating-IP: [131.227.200.31]
X-StarScan-Received:
X-StarScan-Version: 6.11.1; banners=-,-,-
X-VirusChecked: Checked
Received: (qmail 13371 invoked from network); 17 Apr 2014 01:39:35 -0000
Received: from exht011p.surrey.ac.uk (HELO EXHT011P.surrey.ac.uk) (131.227.200.31) by server-15.tower-82.messagelabs.com with AES128-SHA encrypted SMTP; 17 Apr 2014 01:39:35 -0000
Received: from EXMB01CMS.surrey.ac.uk ([169.254.1.54]) by EXHT011P.surrey.ac.uk ([131.227.200.31]) with mapi; Thu, 17 Apr 2014 02:39:34 +0100
From: <l.wood@surrey.ac.uk>
To: <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net>, <ietf@ietf.org>
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 02:39:03 +0100
Subject: RE: DMARC and yahoo
Thread-Topic: DMARC and yahoo
Thread-Index: Ac9Z1cWELixmkwPoQtCrYG33J0QwQwACAq27
Message-ID: <290E20B455C66743BE178C5C84F1240847E9989B8D@EXMB01CMS.surrey.ac.uk>
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> <CE39F90A45FF0C49A1EA229FC9899B0507D47D69@USCLES544.agna.amgreetings.com>, <534F2316.8030409@meetinghouse.net>
In-Reply-To: <534F2316.8030409@meetinghouse.net>
Accept-Language: en-US, en-GB
Content-Language: en-GB
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US, en-GB
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/cBPabG3ADcR6Y4QW_hbEklG-2A4
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: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 01:39:44 -0000

> I think a "guaranteed not to publish p=reject" logo should be offered up by IETF as a branding mechanism. 

... for expired internet-drafts.


Lloyd Wood
http://about.me/lloydwood
________________________________________
From: ietf [ietf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Miles Fidelman [mfidelman@meetinghouse.net]
Sent: 17 April 2014 01:40
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: DMARC and yahoo

MH Michael Hammer (5304) wrote:
>
> I think a "guaranteed not to publish p=reject" logo should be offered up by IETF as a branding mechanism. In fact, I like this idea so much I am going to have a designer friend of mine create it. IETF prominently in the middle with "guaranteed not to publish p=reject" around the perimeter of the circular logo. Participating mailbox providers could display it prominently on their websites and in their marketing materials. Just to be clear for anyone wanting to jump in claiming trademark infringement, this falls under the heading of parody - unless of course Y'all want to take the proposal seriously in which case you can have the logo.
>
>
Can't tell if you're serious or not - but I like it :-)

Kind of like "Best Viewed with Any Browser"

Cheers,

Miles

--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra