Hi Alessandro, Mikael, Patrik, John,
At 04:10 29-04-2014, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
There has been some discussion on what should the IETF do about the
collateral damage experienced by several mailing lists when major
mailbox providers switch their DMARC policies to p=reject.
[snip]
The DMARC draft is currently in "AD Followup" state. A review was
posted here last week, a process which doesn't seem to affect
deployment much.
My review was sent to the ISE. It was copied to
the ietf@xxxxxxxx mailing list for informational
purposes. I did not expect the review to affect deployment.
How is the IETF going to proceed on this issue?
The above question could be ignored as it is
addressed to everybody and nobody on this mailing list. :-)
At 04:22 29-04-2014, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
I would really like to see the standards process
for this mechanism be stopped until the mailing
list problem has been sorted out. I don't really
understand how it got that far with this problem unsolved.
It is likely because only a few persons tried to
do something when it was possible to do so. A
significant number of possible (IETF) issues go
unnoticed as it is not always clear whether they will cause problems.
At 05:55 29-04-2014, Patrik Fältström wrote:
The problem exists if A is publishing such a
policy, B is acknowledging the policy, B is
generating a bounce, and the bounce is hitting the mailing list provider.
I do not understand why a bounce should be
generated (and not the incoming mail to B would
be tagged as spam and/or null-routed).
I posted a simplified example of the problem at
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg87286.html
Silently dropping messages (null-routed) creates mail blackholes.
At 07:39 29-04-2014, John C Klensin wrote:
So, as a purely hypothetical set of questions (I am not
recommending anything), I wonder what would happen if some of
the people who have been claiming they or the general public are
harmed by this would, instead of asking what the IETF can do
about something that is not an IETF Standard, went to their
local "competitiveness" or "antitrust" authorities, explained
the situation and started complaining? I also wonder whether
The regulator might start an investigation. The
(lack of) results can be used as input for governance issues.
There is someone from the European Union reading
this mailing list. The person might be able to comment to help Alessandro.
Regards,
S. Moonesamy