Re: DMARC methods in mailman --- [LEDE-DEV] DMARC related mass bounces / disabled subscriptions (fwd) Jo-Philipp Wich: [LEDE-DEV] DMARC related mass bounces / disabled subscriptions

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 18/12/2016 09:19, Michael Richardson wrote:
> 
> Theodore Ts'o <tytso@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>     > Yeah, it's the "sometimes mail gets lost" problem which is the main
>     > issue.  So it might actually be better to have the mailing list
>     > software refuse to accept a mailing list posting from a domain with a
>     > DMARC record, and it can be bounced back to the sender immediately
>     > with a "sorry, try again using some e-mail address that does not have
>     > DMARC support".
> 
> I really think that this is the right answer for our community.

I don't. Accept the posting but also send a friendly warning seems to do less damage.

> The DMARC policy is not to forward, and we should respect it.

Why does DMARC, which is a broken solution, deserve that much respect?

> When ARC gets standardized, we should implement it.

Assuming it solves the problem, sure. But if it doesn't, the problem will
get much worse.

    Brian




[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]