RE: Enabling DMARC workaround code for all IETF/IRTF mailing lists

[John C Klensin <[e-mail]>]

--On Friday, May 11, 2018 15:13 +0000 "MH Michael Hammer (5304)"
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> John, I have to disagree with your comment in the appendix
> about a decline in bounce messages and changes/implementations
> such as DMARC. Joe Jobs and other abuse have been around a
> long time. Given a choice between constraining (some
> functionality) to mitigate/minimize damage and enabling large
> scale breakdowns of functionality due to abuse, I'll choose
> the former.  I guess it's a case of picking your poison.
> Adjust, don't conform.

Mike,

I tried to say at least twice in that note that, while this
decision saddens me, I am not going to argue that it is the
wrong one to make.  Maybe I'm just suffering for nostalgia for
happier and less hostile times.   However --and with the hope
that this doesn't set off a series of rants in the "final
ultimate solution" category-- I do wonder how far we should be
pushing the assumptions that underlie the design of our email
protocols without reviewing and rethinking those designs.

Or, given the number of reports that almost all people younger
than us are not using email but prefer interactive conversations
of a few hundred characters per turnaround and observations of
people responding to attempts to discuss complex issues with
"TL;DR", perhaps even worrying about email or other
communications in units of paragraphs is nostalgia for a fading
technology and/or culture.

    john