Can someone clarify the optimization of Mailman 3 for MARC? I’ve installed and the options are slightly different than MM 2.1.x and the documentation in the Wiki here: http://wiki.list.org/DEV/DMARC <http://wiki.list.org/DEV/DMARC> which is fine, but I can’t find any post-release documentation. The developer archives are mostly discussions from 2013.

Here’s the current option page and my take on them:

Filter content: [?Should Mailman filter the content of list traffic according to the settings below?] … this seems to be a master switch for everything below.

Collapse alternatives: [?Should Mailman collapse multipart/alternative to its first part content?] … not DMARC

Convert html to plaintext:[?Should Mailman convert text/html parts to plain text? This conversion happens after MIME attachments have been stripped.] … not DMARC

Anonymous list: [?Hide the sender of a message, replacing it with the list address (Removes From, Sender and Reply-To fields)] … affects DMARC but not good for discussion/Reply to list style lists

Include RFC2369 headers: … not DMARC

Include the list post header: … not DMARC

Explicit reply-to address: … not sure how/if this affects DMARC (which is a FROM thing). Also not sure who this interest with REPLY GOES TO LIST, below.

First strip reply to: … not explicitly DMARC … and how it interacts with EXPLICIT and REPLY GOES TO LIST options - seems like it must be done of either other option is enabled

Reply goes to list: [?Where are replies to list messages directed? No Munging is strongly recommended for most mailing lists. This option controls what Mailman does to the Reply-To: header in messages flowing through this mailing list. When set to No Munging, no Reply-To: header is added by Mailman, although if one is present in the original message, it is not stripped. Setting this value to either Reply to List or Explicit Reply causes Mailman to insert a specific Reply-To: header in all messages, overriding the header in the original message if necessary (Explicit Reply inserts the value of reply_to_address). There are many reasons not to introduce or override the Reply-To: header. One is that some posters depend on their own Reply-To: settings to convey their valid return address. Another is that modifying Reply-To: makes it much more difficult to send private replies. See Reply-To' Munging Considered Harmful for a general discussion of this issue. See Reply-To Munging Considered Useful for a dissenting opinion. Some mailing lists have restricted posting privileges, with a parallel list devoted to discussions. Examples are patches' or `checkin' lists, where software changes are posted by a revision control system, but discussion about the changes occurs on a developers mailing list. To support these types of mailing lists, select Explicit Reply and set the Reply-To: address option to point to the parallel list.]

• Does selection REPLY-TO put in a reply header as well as re-write the FROM header?

• I want a REPLY to LIST style list where replies always go to the list. Ideally, I'd like to see the sender’s name (And even email) in text portion of the FROM address even if the list address replaces the FROM address - which I think would solve the FROM/DMARC problem.

Pipeline: [?Type of pipeline you want to use for this mailing list] … can’t find any documentation on this

Thanks in advance,

Dean