ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [dmarc-ietf] IETF Mailing Lists and DMARC

2016-11-03 13:07:23

On Nov 3, 2016, at 10:56 AM, Andrew G. Malis <agmalis(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> 
wrote:


On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 1:30 PM, Terry Zink 
<tzink(_at_)exchange(_dot_)microsoft(_dot_)com> wrote:
The average Internet user doesn't understand DMARC. The average person on an 
Internet mailing list doesn't understand DMARC either, and even the average 
tech person on a mailing list doesn't understand DMARC. All they know is that 
their mailing list doesn't work, or that they have been unsubscribed. Only 
people who work on DMARC understand DMARC.

Asking the average person to switch their email address just so that they can 
participate in mailing lists isn't a solution.

Three thumbs up on the last sentiment above - could you imagine saying to 
someone that you need to switch phone providers in order to reach certain 
recipients? And while my current use of gmail allows me to more or less get 
around DMARC list problems (although I need to check my incoming spam folder 
at least daily since mailing list DMARC failures send legitimate emails 
there), there’s no guarantee how long that will continue.

And regarding Terry's previous paragraph, while I’m by no means an expert on 
DMARC (or mailman for that matter), a bit of googling tells me that there are 
more recent versions of mailman than what the IETF is currently using that 
support DMARC mitigation. See, for example, 
http://www.spamresource.com/2016/09/dmarc-support-in-mailman.html .

"Mitigating the effects of the DMARC reject policy are difficult. All known 
mitigation techniques break some user expectations and/or degrade the user 
experience. Still, it's incumbent on the Mailman developers to try to reduce 
the pain our users feel, and to provide some options for site and list 
administrators who find themselves caught in the middle."

dmarc(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org, of all lists, is not one whose administrators are 
"caught in the middle".

Cheers,
  Steve

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