IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dmarc-ietf] Suggestion: can we test DEMARC deployment with a mailing list?

"Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com> Tue, 06 May 2014 00:38 UTC

Return-Path: <fred@cisco.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 944041A048F for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 May 2014 17:38:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -109.552
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-109.552 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, J_CHICKENPOX_16=0.6, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 tmpcDlKnM23R for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 May 2014 17:38:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-1.cisco.com (alln-iport-1.cisco.com [173.37.142.88]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7A271A03D4 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 May 2014 17:38:04 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2075; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1399336681; x=1400546281; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=nr+G5Ltb+alTCC06hCkGz7bEFTc4ir9KheINqCmvSgs=; b=WDnY5baZIb2ppPZx4x9HgFTOkT/g4AMwQU0LWgIAVFYzXugOpiHeHcsU yD/q7gFn8M8UF+wb32Bho9mKKZpUMnuh/YI3Wb8qyBAQKF4jsaF5nFWx5 z9pOAyfC3I8aRl1Xl/4FDfX4k/gGSVt4282jjncAZB4OgOw1/35Ke6EnQ 4=;
X-Files: signature.asc : 195
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AjoFAMgtaFOtJV2a/2dsb2JhbABZgwaBJ8RQgRwWdIIlAQEBAwFtAQsFCwIBCA4KLjIlAgQOBQ6IKwjNXReNcBEBUAeDKoEVBIRaA4xFgTmGWZJ0gzSBdjk
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,992,1389744000"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="41267749"
Received: from rcdn-core-3.cisco.com ([173.37.93.154]) by alln-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 06 May 2014 00:38:01 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x10.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x10.cisco.com [173.36.12.84]) by rcdn-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s460c1c2004943 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 6 May 2014 00:38:01 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x09.cisco.com ([169.254.9.99]) by xhc-aln-x10.cisco.com ([173.36.12.84]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Mon, 5 May 2014 19:38:01 -0500
From: "Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com>
To: Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Suggestion: can we test DEMARC deployment with a mailing list?
Thread-Topic: [dmarc-ietf] Suggestion: can we test DEMARC deployment with a mailing list?
Thread-Index: AQHPZjEeOHoDyq9mZ0azxe/jQ5CmNJszCbcAgAAAgICAAAD4gIAAAxqA
Date: Tue, 06 May 2014 00:37:59 +0000
Message-ID: <C92FEFD4-06B7-48CD-A1F3-CF6F3DB259DE@cisco.com>
References: <28671EE8-A8B9-40D1-9268-527A8FFC34AD@cisco.com> <53682B10.2070000@meetinghouse.net> <1BB8A9AB-C7C1-4959-B8C2-C649AB4EA19D@cisco.com> <53682C4B.80301@meetinghouse.net>
In-Reply-To: <53682C4B.80301@meetinghouse.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.19.64.118]
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_CCC75784-AA70-410B-87B9-533BC81789AE"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha1"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/nebv6PwoFCyaL8_zj3B0BrO0Nmo
Cc: IETF <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: Tue, 06 May 2014 00:38:09 -0000

On May 5, 2014, at 5:26 PM, Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> wrote:

> Fred Baker (fred) wrote:
>> On May 5, 2014, at 5:21 PM, Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> Fred Baker (fred) wrote:
>>>> We have been having a fairly extended discussion, much of which seems hypothetical - “I don’t like DEMARC because I am worried that ... with mailing lists”. I wonder if we could take a moment to try it and see what happens?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> Ummm..... yahoo changed their dmarc policy to p=reject, lots of mailing lists broke.  What experiment is it that you think we need to run?
>> I guess we’re running it. I was hoping to avoid the “everything around broke” part.
> 
> Well.. I can certainly tell you that, as someone who supports a couple of dozen email lists, an awful lot broke - both for my users (who shared their pain with me) and for me, as an administrator. Lots of things stopped working, for lots of people, overnight - to me that fits the definition of "broke.”

And what comes quickly to mind is the comment, earlier in this thread, that “we have been running it for nine years.”

Running it, perhaps, but not learning from it. Kind of “Really Not The Point”.

Other comments withheld for an opportunity in the presence of adult beverages. Lots of them.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email