Larry Finch wrote:
On Apr 25, 2014, at 11:04 PM, Miles Fidelman
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Larry Finch wrote:
I have some insight into what is happening here. L-Soft just updated
listserv v 16 to do exactly what you describe (I belong to L-Soft’s
site manager and list owner groups). The patch causes listserv to
check for a DMARC DNS record, and if one exists with p=reject it
rewrites the FROM field in the header with what you describe. If the
originating IP does not have a DMARC record or has one and does not
have p=reject listserv ignores it. So either Google uses listserv or
they read the listserv lists also and copied it.
Either way, it is a very ugly workaround.
Why ugly? It strikes me as minimally intrusive (and one of the
options for the current Sympa patch).
Miles Fidelman
It is ugly because it means that different messages with have
different headers, depending on where the message originated. And it
also forces email from Yahoo and AOL to have a Reply To that will
always go back to the original sender rather than the list. Many lists
want replies to go to the list, not the original sender.
It is also ugly because it changes the way received messages appear
from what everyone has been expecting for the last 20 years.
Ok... but no uglier than any of the other workarounds that we're being
forced into by p=reject - which is where the real ugliness lies.
Miles
--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is. .... Yogi Berra
_______________________________________________
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)
