[Tools-discuss] DMARC handling default for IETF mailing lists?

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Thu, 11 April 2019 20:13 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 466BA120103 for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 13:13:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xi7vua1KRuDS for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 13:13:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B3091201CB for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 13:13:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] (p54A6CE73.dip0.t-ipconnect.de []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 44gBzw45P8zycV; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 22:13:32 +0200 (CEST)
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 576706409.981541-513e5f686ef160cba2216a41e0fd2cc9
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 22:13:31 +0200
Message-Id: <71796682-C554-41DC-8529-DA8B20578C40@tzi.org>
To: tools-discuss <tools-discuss@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/5oqvmFINO8A6YbunrIu0gHcHG54>
Subject: [Tools-discuss] DMARC handling default for IETF mailing lists?
X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion <tools-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tools-discuss>, <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tools-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:tools-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss>, <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 20:13:36 -0000

I just configured a mailing list and noticed that the configuration selection

Replace the From: header address with the list's posting address to mitigate issues stemming from the original From: domain's DMARC or similar policies. 
(Details for from_is_list)
No	Munge From	Wrap Message

defaulted to “No”.  Does the list admin have to set this to “Munge From” manually?
(We don’t want to do that with known DMARC-bad source addresses, I believe.)
Or does “No” mean “Munge, if needed”?

Grüße, Carsten