On Thu 13/Jul/2023 10:20:00 +0200 Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 6:20 AM Douglas Foster
<[email protected]> wrote:
Does anyone believe that things will change if we publish an RFC which
says "Verizon Media MUST change to p=none"? I don't.
It would be absurd to make such a directed statement. I trust you're
simply being hyperbolic.
Hyperbole is easily removed by s/VerizonMedia/domains which [conditions]/ as
Scott put it[*].
However, a consensus statement by the IETF saying we believe such operators
are using it wrong, or even harmfully, might be meaningful. In hindsight I
wish we had made RFC 7489 more forceful on this point.
Maybe a MUST at the time would have changed something. Maybe not. In any
case, we have to move forward from where we are _now_. The value of saying
MUST NOT now doesn't seem to achieve much. It sounds something in between
sordid revenge and the "MUST (BUT WE KNOW YOU WON'T)" 2119 extension of RFC 6919...
Lists have been hurt by the move to authenticated email. Point taken.
However, the world is not going back to the good old days,.
I infer from this that not only do you believe a revert is out of the
question, but so too is compromise going forward. I suggest that's rather
an extreme position to take.
To put it more mildly, one could say that lists /suffered/ authentication.
They didn't use it to authenticate posters, for example.
There is no hope for a list solution to appear from outside the list
community.
I don't agree. If the problem originated outside the list community, maybe
the solution ought to come from there.
Agreed. Still, lists have to accept it, wherever it comes from.
If or when list advocates reconcile themselves to that reality, we can
start making real headway on solving the problem.
List /advocates/, not list developers, implementers, general users...
In my view, this is in effect the same thing as saying "Life isn't fair"
again.
The outlines of the solution have been on the table for several years
already. But those solutions have been ignored because list advocates are
waiting for everyone else to change to meet list needs.
I disagree on this point. Yes, John's analysis[†] is of 2014, nearly a decade,
albeit ARC was added in 2016. It seems to be obvious that there is no /simple/
solution. Yet, we didn't explore the more complicated ones.
Can you please explain why lists are so clearly second class use cases to
you?
2nd class was sanctioned by Yahoo's and AOL's move in 2014. I heard they
explicitly said so, but cannot find a pointer.
Best
Ale
--
[*] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/yaNersE40EtsM2KojlMa_3El3Ys
[†] https://wiki.asrg.sp.am/wiki/Mitigating_DMARC_damage_to_third_party_mail
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
