[Mailman-Users] Fwd: [sympa-users] thoughts re. DMARC impacts
victoriano at uma.es
Sun Nov 2 16:46:46 CET 2014
Folks, first my excuses for the "dual posting" but I did not want to
loose the odd Mailman developer that is not subscribed to the users list.
This has recently circulated in the sympa-users lists. As a proud member
of both communities I think that the synergy Miles proposes could really
have some impact. Actually, it would be great if the possible RFC had an
author from each and every list manager in existence (there are not so
many :)), or at least from the big ones, including the commercial
dinosaur, ListServ (I'm connected to a big instance of this beast, so I
might get a direct channel to them).
All this said, please, take a look at Miles message ;-)
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [sympa-users] thoughts re. DMARC impacts
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 20:45:32 -0400
From: Miles Fidelman <mfidelman at meetinghouse.net>
Reply-To: Miles Fidelman <mfidelman at meetinghouse.net>
To: sympa-users at cru.fr <sympa-users at cru.fr>, dmarc at ietf.org
<dmarc at ietf.org>
Many of us just had to deal with the impacts of DMARC on our lists.
In the aftermath, I've been participating on the dmarc-ietf email list -
trying to discuss ways to "fix DMARC" to better coexist with lists and
other 3rd-party services (like "send this article to....").
Unfortunately, it seems like the discussion is bogged down in two regards:
- the ietf-dmarc working group is charted to "enhance DMARC" - dealing
with its impacts is not really the focus - folks want a general purpose
Personally, I'd like to see a short-term solution to make our lives
easier, as list managers - sort of the way that NAT has been dealing
with IPv4 address exhaustion, while we wait for IPv6 to happen.
I've been thinking along the lines of an update to RFC2369 - the
16-year-old document defines the List-* headers. Say by adding a couple
of headers along the lines of:
List-Original-Author: <the original author>
List-Original-Reply-To: <the original message's Reply-To>
List-Reply-To: <the list-specific reply-to - either author of list>
Seems to me that this would:
1. give us a standard way to find the original author (and for HTML
mail, to reply by clicking on a mailto: URL in the header)
2. provide standardized information that could be used by MUAs for
identifying, and presenting reply options (maybe leading to "reply to
list" and "reply to author" buttons starting to show up on toolbars)
3. set the stage for adding some authentication mechanisms that
accomplish what DMARC is intended to do (e.g. by adding a few more
headers that cryptographically authenticate the new List- headers and
bind them to the message body)
It strikes me that this might proceed rather quickly, if incorporated
into an RFC co-authored and submitted by folks from the mailing list
software community (i.e., the folks who'd write the patches to Sympa,
Mailman, ezmlm, etc) - particularly if some running code were to be
implemented as part of the process. (Can you say, "rough consensus and
Reactions? Anybody want to collaborate on a draft RFC for submission
through the independent submissions path? Any thoughts on who needs to
be involved from the Sympa community, and/or from the other mailing list
Miles Fidelman (a frustrated sympa administrator)
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is. .... Yogi Berra
Victoriano Giralt Central ICT Services
Systems Manager University of Malaga
Note: signature.asc is the electronic signature of present message
> Q: Are you sure ?
>> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
>>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email ?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 213 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the Mailman-Users