----- Original Message ----- From: "Viktor Dukhovni" <ietf-dane@xxxxxxxxxxxx> To: <ietf@xxxxxxxx> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 4:33 AM > On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 10:11:58PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: > > > > This is a solved problem, the "Rfc822.Sender" field should have > > > from the outset trumped the "Rfc822.From" field when determining > > > message origin, and the DMARC policy should be that of the "Sender" > > > domain. Some MUAs already expose "Sender != From" by displaying > > > "From <sender> on behalf of <author>". This needs to become standard > > > MUA behaviour. > > > > I am coming around to the point of view. > > Thanks for the moral support. Message origin is subtle business. > In addition to "Sender" which is used by mailing lists and other > proxy agents, there is also "Resent-From" and friends. I am rather > partial to "forwarding" messages not in-line or as attachments, > but as "resent" messages. > > MUAs should expose message origin when different from author. > Viktor, A fine idea, but, as a pragmatic engineer, I know that changes to an MUA will take five, may be ten, years to achieve widespread deployment, whereas changes to MTA could happen in a matter of weeks, if needs must. Tom Petch > > FWIW, the text is from the proposed charter, I didn't write any of it. > > Yes, of course. > > -- > Viktor. > >