Re: (DMARC) How a whitelist would work, was Why mailing lists

"John R Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Thu, 17 April 2014 04:13 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.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 061311A03FE for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 21:13:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.357
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.357 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779] 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 5TLKVIScaGqH for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 21:13:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from miucha.iecc.com (abusenet-1-pt.tunnel.tserv4.nyc4.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f06:1126::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 872DE1A0054 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 21:13:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 76071 invoked from network); 17 Apr 2014 04:13:00 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent:cleverness; s=12926.534f54cc.k1404; bh=LVvQnMgsOP6yBPVeHNDULrL8IQPisdao2FhmFaHEUl4=; b=Ep2jNL2LZOcTaib9hvjhWXPqsqeeiIsrfKw6vjl2zoS5bqQD/g80BcOlUcx0l1QcJMw2ist5WslfnW0ONZUDJepev6xAhyvJ3YU6Lo3W91dIghkg3L7OKRp6Y8Nk/PeZvNF6ACMfAHfO7XNbTiuDF3ZNo9WwCrkp0nCNnvIvDoArWAVqsJBSC6QGrOAFLeH90AxTlN6zI+cD1wYtE56N538g5TyQ4HLD0gZGBNxjqvnu0qeseRbLVHSM+kbkj1Ys
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent:cleverness; s=12926.534f54cc.k1404; bh=LVvQnMgsOP6yBPVeHNDULrL8IQPisdao2FhmFaHEUl4=; b=ChsVtdscmz83owxrf/BdWEoIai4pClv5BVQ6ZNdRYqOiNQa+P+xcMHt4dYHgZAGkI+6jXqgu3u7H/VE3mm7kh5d4mDRREPzJnI6ucTIsY0KLXV7BN23IxUsFaPyhtdYZmEFIN2SMu3WDPX9NCgFOf1DOd6vstLdgG4JGuYCDxlYZTuMIFxYiP6h+GnuJKCZzDvju7Goz5whUTPa/VMGbMhANWmi8SGGpTf5nSUCWTjl2j04NFtV9OfvqkzjtGvsD
Received: from localhost ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.0/X.509/SHA1) via TCP6; 17 Apr 2014 04:13:00 -0000
Date: 17 Apr 2014 00:12:59 -0400
Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1404170008470.2194@joyce.lan>
From: "John R Levine" <johnl@taugh.com>
To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: (DMARC) How a whitelist would work, was Why mailing lists
In-Reply-To: <CAL0qLwYT_y5ksCP5DpHGXEK084zVg=6HfpJ2B2khkK7jDByZmQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CE39F90A45FF0C49A1EA229FC9899B0507D45766@USCLES544.agna.amgreetings.com> <20140414214949.32126.qmail@joyce.lan> <CE39F90A45FF0C49A1EA229FC9899B0507D460CB@USCLES544.agna.amgreetings.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1404142150430.32657@joyce.lan> <CAL0qLwbPMm_i0fqNSGQPv=xZaiNASy=icsRNudaNJ_3PNtX3Og@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1404151832460.38826@joyce.lan> <CAL0qLwZUptJVw85T2FjB2HRGoOvcOUHKiQXeadM0QE9BsFVM9w@mail.gmail.com> <CAKHUCzxpwS+nR9wRGOzU_83f7XabMr0pwB5x-MHrqM-28r80kw@mail.gmail.com> <CAKHUCzzw9mufrTCOBQOkRrZU6wOM21X8Y=FUEKf=qnzS9VESjA@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1404161654430.2065@joyce.lan> <CAL0qLwYT_y5ksCP5DpHGXEK084zVg=6HfpJ2B2khkK7jDByZmQ@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23)
Cleverness: None detected
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: MULTIPART/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1; BOUNDARY="3825401791-808331804-1397707980=:2194"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/zxUiLGhmaGJ_a_M50oyeYakftfI
Cc: "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: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 04:13:09 -0000

> Do you envision each operator maintaining its own whitelist, or one or more
> public registries of them, or something else?

On the assumption that we have reasonably good agreement about what would 
qualify for DMARC whitelisting, I'd think you'd want a small set (maybe 
only one) of public whitelists.

If each receiver has to do its own whitelist, that means that nobody bug a 
big gorilla who can afford to create a whitelist can apply DMARC policies.

R's,
John