ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

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

2014-04-14 12:58:30
Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 8:09 AM, Miles Fidelman <mfidelman(_at_)meetinghouse(_dot_)net <mailto:mfidelman(_at_)meetinghouse(_dot_)net>> wrote:

    Is it perhaps also incumbent on the folks promulgating DMARC (and
    its predecessors, and its sure-to-be successors) to work
    cooperatively with mailing list developers, rather than taking the
    position "nope, we break mailing lists, not our problem?"


The DMARC proponents did engage mailman. Version 2.1.16 includes support for a setting that makes the operation of the list DMARC-friendly, though likely in a way some people will find unpalatable. Either way, it was not done entirely in a vacuum.


    I'm kind of coming to the conclusion that what we need to be
    looking at is defining an SMTP extension that addresses BOTH sets
    of concerns - and doing so in a cooperative manner that engages
    not just the community behind DKIM and DMARC, but also the
    developers and operators of mailman, sympa, majordomo, listserv -
    and ideally the sendmail, postfix, exim, qmail community.

    Dare I suggest that this calls for an IETF working group?


I mentioned in another thread that the DMARC people did come to the IETF to ask for a working group to complete development of the work on the standards track. This request was denied on the grounds that DMARC was essentially already done, and thus the IETF had nothing engineering-wise to contribute. There were also too few people that were not already DMARC proponents that would commit to working on it.

(And as I said on that other thread, I'm happy to stand corrected if I've mischaracterized any of that.)

-MSK


--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>