On April 8, 2014 6:50:29 PM EDT, Dave Crocker <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 4/8/2014 11:58 AM, Murray Kucherawy wrote:
>> On 4/8/14 7:23 AM, "Dave Crocker" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> On the other hand, this has the classic problem of requiring mailing
>>> lists to change.  That is, this approach does not help anyone
>currently
>>> and won't help much for a very long time, if ever.
>>>
>>
>> That's true.  I'm having some trouble with the notion that MLMs need
>to be
>> immune from change because they somehow have that status.
>>
>> You're right that this is a paradigm change.  Just to clarify, are
>you
>> saying those should be off the table outright, or merely that the
>> community really really needs to understand the implications?
>
>
>More the latter than anything else.  What's been demonstrated is that 
>the current approach is traumatic.  I like drama, but not trauma.
>
>The reticence of the broader mailing list community to participate in 
>coordinated, incremental standards efforts does not encourage one to
>try 
>to reduce the trauma, but the damage done to end users should.
>
>Given that we've known about the mailing list issue for DMARC, SPF and 
>DKIM for a very long time, I think it unlikely that anyone is suddenly 
>going to come up with a perfect and painless "solution".
>
>However we haven't tried very hard to develop a carefully orchestrated 
>approach that considers tradeoffs and minimizes end user pain.

Okay. I'll bite. 

For what I think of as a normal mailing list that uses its own mail from and 
does DKIM signature breaking things like modifying the subject line or adding a 
footer to the message with unsubscribe or list archive information, what's the 
canonical solution to interoperating in a DMARC  with p=reject enabled world 
and where is it documented?

Scott K
_______________________________________________
dmarc-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.dmarc.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc-discuss

NOTE: Participating in this list means you agree to the DMARC Note Well terms 
(http://www.dmarc.org/note_well.html)

Reply via email to