----- Original Message ----- > From: "Matt Simerson" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2014 11:13:55 PM > Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Change the mailing list protocol, not DMARC. > > > On Jun 10, 2014, at 10:15 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Matt Simerson writes: > > > >> If message headers and footers are so popular, how do you explain > >> the continued "please unsubscribe me posts" sent to practically > >> every mailing list? > > > > Bell curve. Some people are 2-sigma self-centered, and others are > > 2-sigma clueless. What else is new?[1] > > > > Note that the kind of people who answer FAQs do like having the footer > > so they can say "just click on the link in the footer of any message, > > including this one." > > That just seems to reinforce the point that the message alterations are far > more popular with list *operators* than they are with list *users.* > > I can't help but think that all this energy would be better spent focusing on > solutions that provides a consistent method for email lists to present their > decoration and admin URIs without breaking DKIM. Something that: > > a) Identifies messages as list traffic (aka: List-ID) > b) Incorporates list info into headers (see below) > c) Requests MUA authors to identify list messages in a safe and useful > fashion**
I found that to build the override list for mailing list, I could log DMARC rejected emails that contained a List-Id or List-Post header. Once reviewing the logs (once a week, or once a month), you can make an easy decision if you want to add the found IPs into your override list. you can see the code at: https://github.com/linkedin/dmarc-msys/blob/master/dmarc.lua#L820 _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
