On 13/08/2016 10:23, Andrew G. Malis wrote:
I couldn’t agree more.
Yes. It's been months and we need to know ASAP which of the various remediations
the IETF mailing list service will apply. We all know that there's no ideal
solution but practicality requires something to be done now. Mail via IETF
lists being rejected or quarantined by mainstream mail services is not OK.
It's actually quite hard to discover if the mail service one is using is
rejecting messages.
I know that rewriting breaks some peoples' procmail setups, and I sympathise
with that, but it's a matter of choosing the least bad solution:
On 13/08/2016 11:15, John Levine wrote:
...
There are DMARC workarounds that are more work but suck less.
See http://wiki.asrg.sp.am/wiki/Mitigating_DMARC_damage_to_third_party_mail
Regards
Brian
Cheers,
Andy
On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 6:20 PM, =JeffH
<Jeff(_dot_)Hodges(_at_)kingsmountain(_dot_)com>
wrote:
Regardless of details, applying some sort of remediation to
ietf.org/mailman is becoming more pressing IMV -- I am noticing that
email, sent from pingidentity.com (p=quarantine; pct=100;) via IETF
mailing lists, is not being delivered to my paypal.com inbox at all.
Also, the same is occurring for some email from microsoft.com
(p=quarantine; pct=30;). The same is true for email I might send via my @
paypal.com persona.
The W3C mailing list manager (MLM) is apparently configured to do
rfc5322.from field re-writing which seems to ameliorate the DMARC-MLM
issues (in my experience, at least), and it would be helpful if the IETF
would take similar measures.
thanks,
=JeffH