Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [bozo subtopic]
Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com> Fri, 12 September 2014 13:55 UTC
Return-Path: <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
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 0E3D81A05D3 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Sep 2014 06:55:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.75
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=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 8P9ZTVj-JQti for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Sep 2014 06:55:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ob0-x235.google.com (mail-ob0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::235]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A92E1A004B for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Sep 2014 06:55:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ob0-f181.google.com with SMTP id wo20so513795obc.12 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Sep 2014 06:55:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=4aGONgtPTMXCdUQxqzmfZng1dx7EJ8YD/bCTJNPeJd8=; b=yAZPL3k7QLAntAGj4YJe3HAsu/cWcRIuvTAXGKmA0xK6YUAMp1QSxgvH5CCAYtFt+B qXbwNvgZ18f3gxX7K1uok+Gr+NoCSX/ouorLvLzIf4hVoMyFm97kbnLg+8ZUm2wSweQl V891rcS9wUCOrh3zqCtRmdIY6KmzUo5CepiCH9gKEqJrefMPxACO6evhr9ByioE/uhz5 5ZNcQB6WPhAi3i4MEbfQZif7+zsEWEe84g6Rs2LSkGAfiQwz06N43qEssR/4WDTomWam Vs+wbx/EsKjBuS6KjaaQbUNO0RvU3iHM5rj5B/oycyz3g5DeuGh2RRmk+Tqj3EUnlQPg gsFw==
X-Received: by 10.182.94.230 with SMTP id df6mr8641660obb.36.1410530146515; Fri, 12 Sep 2014 06:55:46 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.76.20.148 with HTTP; Fri, 12 Sep 2014 06:55:25 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <5412E49D.30406@dcrocker.net>
References: <20140911202058.3327.qmail@joyce.lan> <541208F6.1010302@dougbarton.us> <bb48b8f170074ddeb25cbb213f613892@DM2PR0301MB0655.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <5412E49D.30406@dcrocker.net>
From: Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2014 09:55:25 -0400
Message-ID: <CAF4+nEGkB=cYw=6_9ZU8CG77kAGBHbLR9izvzohzNneEZn==7g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [bozo subtopic]
To: Dave Crocker <dcrocker@bbiw.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/xvFEFM_hAN-tsSMEgEey1DnDj14
Cc: Christian Huitema <huitema@microsoft.com>, "ietf@ietf.org" <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: Fri, 12 Sep 2014 13:55:48 -0000
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 8:18 AM, Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> wrote: > On 9/11/2014 10:34 PM, Christian Huitema wrote: >> ... >... > > >> At that point, the issue is mostly with the UI. If my reader did >> recognize the "simple forwarding" case from "authorized remailers," >> then the message wrapping solution would be just fine. The good thing >> is that it is very much under my control. > > This suggests defining a wrapping convention that is sufficiently > distinction so that receiving software can know it is this specific type > of wrapping and can choose to unwrap the message, without doing > unwrapping for other kinds of encapsulated mail. content type message/re-mailed or something? Thanks, Donald ============================= Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA d3e3e3@gmail.com > d/ > > -- > Dave Crocker > Brandenburg InternetWorking > bbiw.net
- gmail users read on... Brian E Carpenter
- Re: gmail users read on... Rich Kulawiec
- Re: gmail users read on... Andrew G. Malis
- Re: gmail users read on... Ross Finlayson
- Re: gmail users read on... Michael Richardson
- Re: gmail users read on... Mary Barnes
- RE: gmail users read on... l.wood
- Re: gmail users read on... Ross Finlayson
- Re: gmail users read on... Ted Faber
- Re: gmail users read on... Tim Bray
- Re: gmail users read on... TJ
- Re: gmail users read on... Ross Finlayson
- Re: gmail users read on... Riccardo Bernardini
- Re: gmail users read on... Paul Hoffman
- Re: gmail users read on... TJ
- Re: gmail users read on... Ted Faber
- Re: gmail users read on... joel jaeggli
- Re: gmail users read on... Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: gmail users read on... [technical subtopic] Brian E Carpenter
- Re: gmail users read on... [bozo subtopic] Brian E Carpenter
- Re: gmail users read on... [bozo subtopic] Andrew G. Malis
- Re: gmail users read on... [bozo subtopic] Hector Santos
- Re: gmail users read on... [bozo subtopic] Antonio Prado
- Re: gmail users read on... [bozo subtopic] Joe Abley
- Re: gmail users read on... [bozo subtopic] Doug Barton
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… John Levine
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… John C Klensin
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Doug Barton
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Doug Barton
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… John Levine
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… John C Klensin
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Nico Williams
- RE: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Christian Huitema
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… George Michaelson
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… John Levine
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Miles Fidelman
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Dave Crocker
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Theodore Ts'o
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Donald Eastlake
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Viktor Dukhovni
- RE: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… MH Michael Hammer (5304)
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Wei Chuang
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Doug Barton
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Dave Crocker
- RE: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… MH Michael Hammer (5304)
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Doug Barton
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Nico Williams
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Sabahattin Gucukoglu
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… John Levine
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… John C Klensin
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Wei Chuang
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Wei Chuang
- Re: gmail users read on... Hector Santos
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Hector Santos
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Scott Kitterman
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Hector Santos
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Hector Santos
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Hector Santos
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Dave Crocker
- Re: gmail users read on... George Michaelson
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… David Morris
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… John Levine
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Rich Kulawiec
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Rich Kulawiec