Re: DMARC: perspectives from a listadmin of large open-source lists

Doug Barton <dougb@dougbarton.us> Mon, 14 April 2014 22:33 UTC

Return-Path: <dougb@dougbarton.us>
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 52F5F1A077E for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 15:33:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.426
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.426 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.272, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 9crUfXKrhoHl for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 15:33:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dougbarton.us (dougbarton.us [IPv6:2607:f2f8:ab14::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 619901A0776 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 15:33:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.4.67] (unknown [67.159.169.102]) by dougbarton.us (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A4B7E22B1A; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 22:33:35 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=dougbarton.us; s=dougbarton.us; t=1397514815; bh=a+zStyLqMfpHQPr8yfATWXNLlQTHhf4X6YVYDAQrMIc=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=EqKnCl/IUL24+jgXFl3veHXh/IG2K1abMmCL+Rk3a/4JWNyhlAwb+i7U+YANPrKfs yFfzOlQgWXuP0vu9C2Xt32LGVV81bB+FuSP2P8bSbtjVxiceCmi3LQ0CezUg7qfxoY YD/dYdwGZw8Ne7hJJ+zffQ00xK2YsIDpB2d4Ov3k=
Message-ID: <534C623E.9080100@dougbarton.us>
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2014 15:33:34 -0700
From: Doug Barton <dougb@dougbarton.us>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "MH Michael Hammer (5304)" <MHammer@ag.com>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: DMARC: perspectives from a listadmin of large open-source lists
References: <20140414024956.26078.qmail@joyce.lan> <534B524F.4050206@dcrocker.net> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1404132327560.26258@joyce.lan> <E0B7196CB2603B80BBEC21AF@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1404132346420.26386@joyce.lan> <1EBDF5239EEE5202D3837D25@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <534B9760.90301@dougbarton.us> <534BFA0D.7000404@meetinghouse.net> <CE39F90A45FF0C49A1EA229FC9899B0507D45766@USCLES544.agna.amgreetings.com>
In-Reply-To: <CE39F90A45FF0C49A1EA229FC9899B0507D45766@USCLES544.agna.amgreetings.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
OpenPGP: id=1A1ABC84
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/wLjIvD_RhzChmoAs_YuH_UlFyXI
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: Mon, 14 Apr 2014 22:33:39 -0000

On 04/14/2014 09:53 AM, MH Michael Hammer (5304) wrote:
> The fact is that a vocal constituency led by John Levine made it extremely clear that MLMs were out of scope and there was zero interest on the part of the MLM community in discussing ways in which MLMs could be made to work in an email authentication framework even if there were any MLM operators willing to do so.

Mike,

While I appreciate your version of the history, the above (and the other 
places where you seem to be placing the blame on John Levine) read like 
a bad excuse to me. "John was mean to us" only works if John were 
somehow the elected representative of the MLM Software Cabal, and was 
speaking on their behalf.

We already have evidence that someone from the DMARC community reached 
out to the mailman devs and that resulted in forward motion on a 
solution. That effort should be both applauded and encouraged. Making 
excuses for not conducting additional such outreaches is just ... weak.

Doug