Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin of a bunch of SMALL community lists
Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> Sat, 12 April 2014 21:21 UTC
Return-Path: <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net>
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 0C5161A0249 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 12 Apr 2014 14:21:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 2.419
X-Spam-Level: **
X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.419 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, J_CHICKENPOX_16=0.6, MISSING_HEADERS=1.021, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 fcif-wLyZoca for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 12 Apr 2014 14:21:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from server1.neighborhoods.net (server1.neighborhoods.net [207.154.13.48]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A5781A0243 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 12 Apr 2014 14:21:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by server1.neighborhoods.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26153CC0BE for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 12 Apr 2014 17:20:58 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-2.6.2 (20081215) (Debian) at neighborhoods.net
Received: from server1.neighborhoods.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (server1.neighborhoods.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id lbJCTrL4FcwE for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 12 Apr 2014 17:20:53 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from new-host.home (pool-173-76-155-14.bstnma.fios.verizon.net [173.76.155.14]) by server1.neighborhoods.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 99181CC0B9 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 12 Apr 2014 17:20:53 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <5349AE35.2000908@meetinghouse.net>
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2014 17:20:53 -0400
From: Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:28.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/28.0 SeaMonkey/2.25
MIME-Version: 1.0
CC: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin of a bunch of SMALL community lists
References: <53499A5E.9020805@meetinghouse.net> <5349A261.9040500@dcrocker.net>
In-Reply-To: <5349A261.9040500@dcrocker.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/omEcOIeU7XBzz3w1l9g756B1Lmc
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: Sat, 12 Apr 2014 21:21:02 -0000
Dave, Dave Crocker wrote: > On 4/12/2014 12:56 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote: >> - DMARC.org defines the "DMARC Base Specification" with a link to >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-kucherawy-dmarc-base/ - an IETF >> document > > While the Internet-Draft mechanism is operated by the IETF, it is an > open mechanism and issuance through it carries no automatic status, > particularly with respect to the IETF. > > The DMARC specification is not 'an IETF document'. The current plan > is to publish it as an RFC, through the 'Independent' stream, which > also is /not/ an IETF activity. > My point is that the folks behind dmarc PRESENT it in a way that implicitly makes it look like an IETF document, and that it's on the standards track. The reality, as you say, is different. "Plan to" is vaporware. > >> - the referenced document is an informational Internet draft, that > > Drafts do not have status. So the qualifier 'informational' here is > not meaningful. > As currently published, it carries the header Intended status: Informational > >> In essence, DMARC is being represented as a mature, standards-track IETF >> specification - with the implication that it's been widely vetted, and >> is marching through the traditional experimental -> optional -> >> recommended -> mandatory steps that IETF standards go through. >> >> In reality: >> - DMARC was developed by a tiny number of people, all of whom work for >> very large ISPs > > Well, a few of us who participated don't... fair enough - but again, just look at http://dmarc.org/about.html - I don't see your name, or any other small individuals or ISPs - what I do see are "A group of leading organizations came together in the spring of 2011" and "The founding contributors include: * *Receivers:* AOL, Comcast, GMail, Hotmail, Netease, Yahoo! Mail * *Senders:* American Greetings, Bank of America, Facebook, Fidelity, JP Morgan Chase, LinkedIn, PayPal * *Intermediaries & Vendors:* Agari, Cloudmark, ReturnPath, Trusted Domain Project" This was very much an industry-based effort. > >> - as far as I can tell, all input from the broader community - notably >> mailing list developers and operators was roundly ignored or dismissed >> (the transcript is really clear on this) > > What transcript? I'm not aware of its being 'ignored or dismissed'. Funny, that's the impression I get when I read back through the archives for dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org and dmarc@ietf.org pretty much all discussion of aligning the From: field came down to - "you change" > >> - while DMARC is at least partially tested, deploying and honoring >> "p=reject" messages is brand new, and has wreaked tremendous damage >> across the net > > It's not new at all, though of course Yahoo's use is distinctive. Depends on your definition of "new" - and while DMARC builds on an older base, DMARC itself was started in 2011, and I assume the first standards and software are more recent then that. As you say, Yahoo's use is "distinctive" - though I'd use a somewhat stronger word. > > >> - as far as I can tell, those who are behind DMARC are taking the >> position "it's not our problem" (see discussions on >> dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org and dmarc@ietf.org) - and there is nary a Yahoo >> representative to be seen anywhere > > I've no idea what specifics you are referring to. I've been following the discussions, on lots of lists, and I've yet to see someone say even "I'm from Yahoo and we feel your pain" - much less "hmm... maybe this wasn't such a good idea, we're going to back off and implement in a slightly gentler manner - and maybe provide some support to help patch the major list management packages" - or even "our implementation honors Original-Authentication-Results" nope - as far as I can tell, the folks who turned on p=reject at Yahoo don't seem to have even told their own security or customer care folks about what's going on - at least when this first broke, and I contacted Yahoo's postmaster (thinking I needed to get our servers back on the whitelist) - they just pointed me at the whitelist request form > > >> The situation strikes me as incredibly perverse and broken - the more so >> that the perpetrators are presenting this as blessed by the IETF >> standards process. > > I haven't seen anyone present such a claim of blessing. Please point > to the specifics. > > I fear you are confusing the difference between a desire for standards > status with a claim of its having been granted. > No... I'm quoting the way that dmarc.org is presenting the "DMARC Draft Specification" - as marching through the IETF standards track, as it is generally understood, and then hiding in the fine print that no such thing has happened, or is currently happening I'm not confused. It is, and I think intentionally, being presented in a way that is intended to confuse. And I personally think that IETF should be calling them on it. Officially, loudly, and clearly. (The same way that Xerox and Kleenex jump down the throats of anybody who tries to use their names generically. ) Miles Fidelman -- In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. .... Yogi Berra
- DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin of a … Miles Fidelman
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Dave Crocker
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Michael Richardson
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Miles Fidelman
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Hector Santos
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Theodore Ts'o
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Miles Fidelman
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Mark Andrews
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Hector Santos
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Douglas Otis
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Dave Crocker
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Andrew G. Malis
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… ned+ietf
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Miles Fidelman
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Miles Fidelman
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… John Levine
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Theodore Ts'o
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Miles Fidelman
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Miles Fidelman
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Miles Fidelman
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Dick Franks
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Dick Franks
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Miles Fidelman
- Re[2]: DMARC and yahoo mohammed serrhini
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Hector Santos
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Dick Franks
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Dave Crocker
- Re: DMARC and yahoo Doug Royer
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Miles Fidelman
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Warren Kumari
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Murray S. Kucherawy
- RE: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… MH Michael Hammer (5304)
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Miles Fidelman
- Re: DMARC and yahoo Theodore Ts'o
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Dick Franks
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Rolf E. Sonneveld
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Dave Crocker
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Miles Fidelman
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Dave Cridland
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Dick Franks
- What I've been wondering about the DMARC problem Brian E Carpenter
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… Doug Barton
- Re: DMARC and yahoo Doug Royer
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… Miles Fidelman
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… Miles Fidelman
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Ted Lemon
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… Theodore Ts'o
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Scott Kitterman
- Re: DMARC and yahoo Theodore Ts'o
- What I've been wondering about the DMARC problem Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… Miles Fidelman
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Sabahattin Gucukoglu
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… Seth Johnson
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… Seth Johnson
- RE: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… l.wood
- Re: DMARC and yahoo Douglas Otis
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… Seth Johnson
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… Dave Crocker
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Hector Santos
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… Miles Fidelman
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… Seth Johnson
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… Miles Fidelman
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… Paul Ferguson
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… Miles Fidelman
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… Hector Santos
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… Miles Fidelman
- RE: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… MH Michael Hammer (5304)
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… Hector Santos
- RE: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… MH Michael Hammer (5304)
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: DMARC and yahoo Doug Royer
- Re: DMARC and yahoo Theodore Ts'o
- Re: DMARC and yahoo Michael Richardson
- Re: DMARC and yahoo Theodore Ts'o
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… Sabahattin Gucukoglu
- Re: DMARC and yahoo Stephen Farrell
- Re: DMARC and yahoo Hector Santos
- Re: DMARC and yahoo Randy Bush
- Re: DMARC and yahoo Yoav Nir
- RE: DMARC and yahoo MH Michael Hammer (5304)
- Re: DMARC and yahoo Theodore Ts'o
- RE: DMARC and yahoo MH Michael Hammer (5304)
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… Jim Fenton
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: DMARC and yahoo Miles Fidelman
- RE: DMARC and yahoo l.wood
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… ned+ietf
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Douglas Otis
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… John C Klensin
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… Sabahattin Gucukoglu
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… ned+ietf
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… ned+ietf
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… Miles Fidelman
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Hector Santos
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… Theodore Ts'o
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… John Levine
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Martin Rex
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Doug Barton
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… ned+ietf
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… John Levine
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Miles Fidelman
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… Sabahattin Gucukoglu
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… Sabahattin Gucukoglu
- RE: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… MH Michael Hammer (5304)
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Miles Fidelman
- RE: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… MH Michael Hammer (5304)
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Miles Fidelman
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Doug Barton
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Theodore Ts'o
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Randy Bush
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… ned+ietf
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Miles Fidelman
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… ned+ietf
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… John C Klensin
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… ned+ietf
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… ned+ietf
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Hector Santos
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… John C Klensin
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Pete Resnick
- Re: DMARC and yahoo Jeffrey Altman
- Re: DMARC and yahoo John Levine
- Re: DMARC and yahoo Hector Santos
- Re: DMARC and yahoo John C Klensin
- Re: DMARC and yahoo Brian E Carpenter
- One size doesn't fit all [Re: DMARC ....] Brian E Carpenter
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Dave Crocker
- Somebody always claims something (was Re: DMARC f… Dave Crocker
- Re: DMARC and yahoo Doug Barton
- Re: DMARC and yahoo Hector Santos
- Re: DMARC and yahoo Theodore Ts'o
- RE: DMARC and yahoo Christian Huitema
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… ned+ietf
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… ned+ietf
- Re: DMARC and yahoo Yoav Nir
- Re: DMARC and yahoo John Levine
- Re: DMARC and yahoo Dave Crocker
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: DMARC and yahoo Doug Royer
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… ned+ietf
- Re: DMARC and yahoo Dave Crocker
- Re: DMARC and yahoo Douglas Otis
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… John Levine
- Re: DMARC and yahoo Brian E Carpenter
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: DMARC and yahoo Rolf E. Sonneveld
- Re: What I've been wondering about the DMARC prob… ned+ietf
- Re: DMARC and yahoo Douglas Otis
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Doug Barton
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Martin Rex
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Doug Barton
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Miles Fidelman
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Miles Fidelman
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Martin Rex
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Scott Kitterman
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Douglas Otis
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Scott Kitterman
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Martin Rex
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… John R Levine
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Ted Lemon
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… ned+ietf
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Dave Crocker
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Martin Rex
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Douglas Otis
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Hector Santos
- The IETF environment (was: Re: DMARC from the per… ned+ietf
- Re: The IETF environment Dave Crocker
- RE: The IETF environment Adrian Farrel
- Re: The IETF environment Miles Fidelman
- Re: The IETF environment Miles Fidelman
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Miles Fidelman
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: The IETF environment Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: The IETF environment Dale R. Worley
- Re: The IETF environment Brian E Carpenter
- Re: The IETF environment Dave Crocker
- Re: The IETF environment Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin o… Hector Santos
- Re: The IETF environment S Moonesamy
- Re: The IETF environment Dave Crocker
- Re: The IETF environment Miles Fidelman
- RE: The IETF environment Christian Huitema
- Re: The IETF environment S Moonesamy
- Re: The IETF environment Miles Fidelman
- Workshop effects [Re: The IETF environment] Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Workshop effects [Re: The IETF environment] Abdussalam Baryun