IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Hector Santos <hsantos@isdg.net> Tue, 06 May 2014 17:03 UTC

Return-Path: <hsantos@isdg.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 343A01A01B9 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 May 2014 10:03:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 ocNvcyk5pKu5 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 May 2014 10:03:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pop3.winserver.com (ntbbs.winserver.com [208.247.131.9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 806851A01AE for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 6 May 2014 10:03:43 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; d=isdg.net; s=tms1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/relaxed; l=903; t=1399395812; h=Received:Received: Received:Received:Message-ID:Date:From:Organization:To:Subject: List-ID; bh=3lLV/ZezV1YSM5p7JjuGrZ/iMV0=; b=bgpdorJ574My8PdCCOjt frq55AgI2Neo2wMUm3J9DSbjrqVqmoR2qDbskUzHSLQawboMjiKfj6MCL5o8iL7m mfCxoxJ5UJpuyrWLTiqxyRxKKLqx0kM74o1rFG10JKzUCo1C77sVJWQSQbw373OL nqIpVcgoRHntHgf298ZhPZ4=
Received: by winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP Router v7.0.454.4) for ietf@ietf.org; Tue, 06 May 2014 13:03:32 -0400
Authentication-Results: dkim.winserver.com; dkim=pass header.d=beta.winserver.com header.s=tms1 header.i=beta.winserver.com; adsp=pass policy=all author.d=isdg.net asl.d=beta.winserver.com;
Received: from beta.winserver.com (opensite.winserver.com [208.247.131.23]) by winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP v7.0.454.4) with ESMTP id 2504367292.1852.2220; Tue, 06 May 2014 13:03:30 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; d=beta.winserver.com; s=tms1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/relaxed; l=903; t=1399395706; h=Received:Received: Message-ID:Date:From:Organization:To:Subject:List-ID; bh=enSTm8P hyxd2u2veZYAj/UvVXAghKWiOcpmdJY4Dh7o=; b=aHZNE7lZfMFq0RF1negouuB b7pY1IBggVWCqjUwtbL7veVhtms4DfSDSeZ6KhlwcT42h+661qOZ6hdHewxU093u zbRrD40gUJum6bo4q7u05MSbtQD0U7lX5BbiEV7DcFMZsST+UbjOEYuVDQ5TkWNf s936A4RtRGp9xlmpQXMM=
Received: by beta.winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP Router v7.0.454.4) for ietf@ietf.org; Tue, 06 May 2014 13:01:46 -0400
Received: from [192.168.1.2] ([99.121.4.27]) by beta.winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP v7.0.454.4) with ESMTP id 2523882218.9.14036; Tue, 06 May 2014 13:01:45 -0400
Message-ID: <536915E0.8080602@isdg.net>
Date: Tue, 06 May 2014 13:03:28 -0400
From: Hector Santos <hsantos@isdg.net>
Organization: Santronics Software, Inc.
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com>, Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Suggestion: can we test DEMARC deployment with a mailing list?
References: <28671EE8-A8B9-40D1-9268-527A8FFC34AD@cisco.com> <53682B10.2070000@meetinghouse.net> <1BB8A9AB-C7C1-4959-B8C2-C649AB4EA19D@cisco.com> <53682C4B.80301@meetinghouse.net> <C92FEFD4-06B7-48CD-A1F3-CF6F3DB259DE@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <C92FEFD4-06B7-48CD-A1F3-CF6F3DB259DE@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/texlVnEAX66XjO3K-ov7BC_7J48
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 17:03:47 -0000

On 5/5/2014 8:37 PM, Fred Baker (fred) wrote:
>
> I guess we�re running it. I was hoping to avoid the �everything around broke� part.
>
> ...
>
> 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�.

   At the end of the day, this is all about the IETF desiring a 
"Freedom to DKIM Sign/Resign Mail" at any middleware, host, router. 
hop, forwarder, mailer, list service, etc, node along the transport 
part in the mail network without author domain restrictions.

Either you believe in an author domain DKIM regulated mail system or 
not.  The resigners do not believe no one uses "strict" policies 
anyway, and if Mom&Pop biz does, WHO CARES!!  The IETF has certainly 
shown it doesn't.

That pretty much sums it up.

-- 
HLS

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email