On 26/10/2015 09:41, Philip Homburg wrote: > In your letter dated 25 Oct 2015 20:24:55 -0000 you wrote: >>> No idea how flexible mailman is, but how hard would it be to write some >>> code that ... >> >> Instead of guessing, five seconds of googlage found this informative page: >> >> http://wiki.list.org/DEV/DMARC > > I guess this is a complex way of saying, no mailman doesn't do that? > >> Re your suggestion, how many subscribers to IETF lists currently use >> gmail? Only a kind person at the Secretariat could answer that definitively. Based on a couple of lists I happen to administer, I estimate that it's 15 to 20%. Based on recent editions of the Narten posting summary, a similar fraction of the traffic on this list is from gmail addresses. >> What would happen if they were all summarily ejected? In fact, today's problem (from my observations) is the small proportion of IETF folk who post from yahoo.com addresses. Their traffic is simply lost as far as any dmarc-obeying receiver is concerned. Gmail won't be a problem until June 2016, as indicated in the story that prompted this thread. > My proposal was not to eject them but to mark them as second class citizens. Indeed. And if it came to that, speaking for myself, I would switch to an address not contaminated by dmarc p=reject, unless a good solution for mailing lists was found first. Brian > People who use unresponsive big e-mail providers off load a lot of problems > to the community. > > Using a constant from should be a good incentive to look for alternatives > but does not provent people from contributing. > >