I wonder why then I got a bunch of issues with btopenworld.com, which apparently is Yahoo based. I just checked btopenworld.com with the ‘host’ command and as you say, it has no ‘reject’:
$ host -t TXT _dmarc.btopenworld.com
_dmarc.btopenworld.com descriptive text "v=DMARC1\; p=none\; fo=1\; rua=mailto:dmarcagg@btinternet.com, mailto:dmarc_agg@auth.returnpath.net\;"
$ host -t TXT _dmarc.yahoo.com
_dmarc.yahoo.com descriptive text "v=DMARC1\; p=reject\; sp=none\; pct=100\; rua=mailto:dmarc-yahoo-rua@yahoo-inc.com, mailto:dmarc_y_rua@yahoo.com\;”
Here is the reject notice:
Final-Recipient: rfc822; subscriber@aol.com Original-Recipient: rfc822;subscriber@aol.com Action: failed Status: 5.2.1 Remote-MTA: dns; mailin-04.mx.aol.com Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 521 5.2.1 : AOL will not accept delivery of this message.
Date: May 13, 2015 at 07:52:17 PDT From: <sender@btopenworld.com> To: <list address> Subject: subject Reply-To: sender@btopenworld.com
And yes, as I just wrote, I have good reasons for keeping this as simple as I possibly can. Upgrading is not simple, I suspect, though I’d love to move to 3.0, as I have a lot of lists, with subscribers on many lists simulteneously.
Yours,
AllanOn May 24, 2015, at 11:14 , Stephen J. Turnbull <stephen@xemacs.org> wrote:
Allan Hansen writes:
Checking for aol.com and yahoo.com here alone will not work. I have a bunch of other subscribers that have accounts with providers that are owned by Yahoo (mostly) and AOL, but whose addresses are not of this form.
Oddly enough, it turns out that they only use DMARC p=reject at their principal domain (aol.com and yahoo.com). You can check for any given domain by prepending _dmarc. and checking the TXT record. For example, for aol.com it would be "host -t TXT _dmarc.aol.com" if you have the host utility for doing DNS lookups.
I would have to do this for all addresses, to be safe.
If you're worried about safety and care about conforming to standards, you really should upgrade to at least Mailman 2.1.18-1. That allows you to be nonconformant only for authors whose addresses are in troublesome domains, and handles the reply-to issue as well as possible (making everybody happy isn't quite possible). I'm sure you have good reason for not doing so *right* *now*, but keep it in mind.
If I do this and add the bit about the Reply-To, what would the code look like?
If you do it for all mail, you just delete the "if" line and shift everything left one dedent.
name, addr = parseaddr(msg.get('from')) name = "%s (%s) via list" % (name if name else "Anonymous", addr) fromaddr = mlist.GetListEmail() del msg['from'] msg['from'] = formataddr((name, addr)) # reply-to handling goes here
I'm not comfortable trying to say what to do about reply-to, because it's quite complicated depending on how you want to handle each of a large number of variations: what to do with a preexisting Reply-To and whether to put the list and/or the from address there. See the Mailman/Handlers/CookHeaders.py file in the Mailman distribution.