Re: Yahoo breaks every mailing list in the world including the IETF's

Phillip Hallam-Baker <> Sat, 17 May 2014 17:04 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F9F91A0110 for <>; Sat, 17 May 2014 10:04:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.278
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.278 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8a4U1lEmxVfp for <>; Sat, 17 May 2014 10:04:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::234]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 04E351A00BE for <>; Sat, 17 May 2014 10:04:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id l18so6085311wgh.11 for <>; Sat, 17 May 2014 10:04:40 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=yTBYvLM+g1ZgRUdIz6grJ7CoJE1Q3D2JX5thgiI2dXU=; b=Mx9Oj4yCYuAR2SI5ZmuiyHApylh7qjTBN6AML7k7UK9lVk4O1/D47T7s0Lb2y+/u10 prPGEq6Eyvu8e68x46USAamMmnfLQ25Gsua0Yz/KH+JFUTgr+stU0wv+KlMTRhBoEMnh IjYdqRAptKsJ09HzK+kML31mUP58AwbCxwdo5OmXSPzahbwYgOui6ASe5EnpNGpcCj1y ryo9/hTj6Z5kkZNvqD2mliCYI0hio9+MaTzE/8duvPEm4+iYwtr84YLeREDpumzAiALO lo8YV26IuC1I4qwpEkF1NpRfnAur937kZiEVbJg7cGv05l2b7NIZtPM2bJuvVf5Ie9D8 0yGQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by with SMTP id bp8mr206304wjb.73.1400346280472; Sat, 17 May 2014 10:04:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with HTTP; Sat, 17 May 2014 10:04:40 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <>
Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 13:04:40 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: I_j4mJaQsol4Tg3GJ-KuQZZusHg
Message-ID: <>
Subject: Re: Yahoo breaks every mailing list in the world including the IETF's
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <>
To: S Moonesamy <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Cc: Eric Dynamic <>, IETF Discussion Mailing List <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 17:04:43 -0000

Yet more special pleading.

This argument might make sense if it was claimed that Google, Yahoo
etc were doing this for some corporate agenda. But I am pretty certain
that is not the case here. Google, Yahoo etc. are doing this because
they think it is in the interests of their customers because they
believe it will reduce spam.

A legitimate argument against DMARC would be 'Here is a research study
based on empirical evidence that shows DMARC does not help'', it might
not be persuasive but it would be a valid argument to have. I am
certain that the Google, Yahoo, Microsoft, etc. folk have those

So what is the argument being made against? I see a lot of
hypotheticals and I see a lot of people arguing that the real problem
here is that Google, Yahoo and Microsoft are putting what they
consider to be the best interests of their customers ahead of
compliance with purported IETF diktats.

I find the arguments that IETF should ignore the impact of DMARC
unpersuasive. We have changed email repeatedly in response to non
standards compliant actions taken by the spam senders. So there is a
precedent for responding to malicious actions, why would we treat
non-malicious actions differently?

We are engineers, not priests. If people think DMARC is creating a
problem then explain the problem precisely and find a solution.