Ken Hornstein wrote in <20190926231658.6947788FC8@pb-smtp20.pobox.com>:
|>And it is entirely unrelated to this thread of course.
|
|I mean, at least we're in agreement there :-/ And I'm not even sure
|WHY you care about what version of TLS that eggs.gnu.org supports, since
|it is handling messages for public mailing lists.
That is a rabbit starter. You know, if it would be me then TLS
would not be needed at all. That entire complex bores me to
paralysis. But there are bad people, everywhere, so this stacks
up from and to governments from and to industry and even from and
to science. Maybe that is why people then enlighten their ripped
backsides by publishing their (maybe) deep(est) inside on some
public maybe social media, including photos. I don't know.
|>I personally feel sad because of the direction all this goes to.
|
|Sigh. Well, if you want to just scream at the void, ok ... I can
|understand that (I wish you wouldn't scream on nmh-workers, personally).
|But ... DKIM/SPF/DMARC all exist because of spam. While I don't agree
Hm.
|with Yahoo's solution and if we had to do it all over we'd deal with
|things very differently, I understand and can sympathize with the
|decisions they have made.
Oh. I can go up the wall on occasions, really. That is certainly
true. I cannot, absolutely not. Maybe they should have invented
or reused the MIME types which exist for signed and encrypted data
instead. (I know of two, S/MIME and OpenPGP.)
...
--End of <20190926231658.6947788FC8@pb-smtp20.pobox.com>
Valdis Klētnieks wrote in <73912.1569546833@turing-police>:
|On Thu, 26 Sep 2019 12:36:41 -0400, Ken Hornstein said:
|> I received this email, and I wanted to pass it along. The executive
|> summary is: in the near future subject lines to nmh-workers will no
|> longer be prefixed with "[nmh-workers]" and there won't be a footer
|> at the end of the message anyone saying that this is the nmh-workers
|
|OK by me., my procmailrc already uses '*^(To:|cc:).*nmh-workers@nongnu.org'
|so it won't bother my set-up.
I for one archive this list among others in a box called "track".
It is nice to see what is what from a glance, like, e.g.,
Re: [art] Auto-configuring Email Clients via WebFinger
Re: [Resolverless-dns] Paper on Resolver-less DNS
Since many discussions or topics actually spread several lists,
not only on IETF but everywhere, it is nice to see them
altogether (at least in date sorted mode). For example in
a heritage site something comes up and reminds someone of
something else, which then leads to a thread in a different
heritage side. I store those in one box, and then you get the
brainwaves a bit. And at a glance. I like this.
...
--End of <73912.1569546833@turing-police>
Andy Bradford wrote in <20190926210904.82686.qmail@angmar.bradfordfamily\
.org>:
|Thus said Ken Hornstein on Thu, 26 Sep 2019 12:36:41 -0400:
|> You can read the details in the message for the complete technical
|> reasons why this is happening; the other option is to do what is
|> called "Munge From" and I personally think this is 100x worse (I am on
|> a Yahoo mailing list where this is done and I hate it).
|
|I won't mind if the Subject stops being mangled (I use the list-post
|header for filtering). I also won't mind if the body stops being mangled
|with additional MIME parts; the same information is already available in
|the list-(un)?subscribe headers) and I'm of the opinion that list
|control mechanisms belong in headers. Besides, how often does someone
|accidentally get subscribed to a mailing list anymore?
I agree with the headers, and i do not inject footers in the ML
myself. That has much to do with that i am or was subscribed to
MLs where, if MIME mails come in, the ML software was not smart
enough to inject the footer in the text part, but simply added
a MIME part with nothing but the footer, and that was an outcome
that i really disliked. (Have not seen that behaviour in a while,
consciously at least.)
|I don't think however, that "Munge From" sounds like a good idea.
Yeah.
...
--End of <20190926210904.82686.qmail@angmar.bradfordfamily.org>
Ralph Corderoy wrote in <20190927085932.D3B581FE76@orac.inputplus.co.uk>:
|> the other option is to do what is called "Munge From"
|
|That's one other option.
|
|Note, nmh-workers has been configured with
|dmarc_moderation_action="Munge From" for ages and no one here has
|grumbled. It typically only munges Froms from Yahoo! I expect the
|other two nmh lists match this as I went through all their options on
|becoming list admin.
|
|Another option supported by this Mailman is, in the Yahoo! case, to
|
| Wrap Message
| Just wrap the message in an outer message with the From: header
| containing the list's posting address and with the original
| From: address added to the addresses in the original Reply-To:
| header and with Content-Type: message/rfc822. This is
| effectively a one message MIME format digest.
|
|but that installs a Reply-To that doesn't include the list.
My ML strips them. Any user has the opportunity to use signing
for his own mail. If you want more, place the untouched envelope
inside a new envelope, that is how it is done for hundreds of
years, or maybe longer, and i do not know what is bad about it.
Good MUAs can then react upon MIME types and adjust the display.
(Mine cannot truly, yet, you just get sequential envelope infos.)
Any user will see, there is an enwrapped envelope. Ach, i don't
know. But blowing up an infrastructure like that, because it just
has to be done that very, and no other way, that is bitter.
--End of <20190927085932.D3B581FE76@orac.inputplus.co.uk>
--steffen
|
|Der Kragenbaer, The moon bear,
|der holt sich munter he cheerfully and one by one
|einen nach dem anderen runter wa.ks himself off
|(By Robert Gernhardt)
--
nmh-workers
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers