--On Monday, 21 July, 2014 02:03 +1200 Brian E Carpenter
<brian(_dot_)e(_dot_)carpenter(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
On 21/07/2014 01:26, Michael Richardson wrote:
Regardless of how/if/why/when we process DMARC as a
specification, we need to decide how ietf.org MTA is going to
deal with things.
1) someone has to fund changes to mailman, and perform
testing, installation, and community education for the IETF
mailing lists. That implies that we have to decide *for
ourselves* where and how we will "break" the DMARC/DKIM
connection, and if we will reject email from p=reject
senders before we attempt to relay.
I thought the preferred solution was to rewrite the From for
those users only.
Brian,
I think that remains controversial. At least some of us would
prefer that we scan IETF lists for addresses that might be
affected, notify those people that they will no longer be able
to send to IETF lists from those addresses, and then, while we
would continue to deliver traffic to them to the degree
feasible, any traffic originating from them would simply be
rejected or bounced by mailman. That requires changes and some
tool work too, but puts the pain where it belongs -- on the
DMARC-using systems and those who choose to have addresses on
then.
I have mixed feelings about recommending that strategy for the
more general community and am happy to let the proposed WG do
its job, but, as far as the IETF community is concerned, we are
all presumably capable of understanding the issues and finding
other addresses if needed.
john