On 21/07/2016 05:42, Dave Crocker wrote:
On 7/20/2016 7:34 PM, Michael Richardson wrote:
Dave Crocker <dhc(_at_)dcrocker(_dot_)net> wrote:
> There is an effort (ARC) to develop a capability that might let
> DMARC-related
> messages survive transit of a mailing list, but that effort is still
> nascent.
It's been two years of "please wait" (or is it three?)
Indeed. And it will be longer before a work-around is both developed and
deployed. You're welcome. No, really, it was a
pleasure contributing to the effort...
I think that it is time to reject email coming into mailing lists that
has p=reject policy, and not forward it, as that is the policy of the mail
system.
Go ahead. I'm sure the relevant users will not pursue any remedies at losing
connectivity, such as moving to a different list
provider.
Which is to say, that I and almost all others are /very/ unhappy with this
'side effect' problem caused by DMARC, but that
real-world pragmatics are making it unrealistic to take simple, purity-based
actions in response.
Yes. So I repeat the question: Since the most pragmatic, non-purity-based
solution is to rewrite the sender field for mail from p=reject (or p=quarantine)
domains, when will we change the IETF and IRTF mailmen to do so?
I'm happy to help experiment for any lists for which I am an admin, but we need
the IETF's IT support to take this very seriously very soon. The day that gmail
changes its policy, I estimate that at least 20% of the IETF will be broken.
Brian