On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 5:04 PM Noel Butler via mailop <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 12/07/2021 22:09, Al Iverson via mailop wrote: > > > > have to conform to the whims of others. > > > Never. They are our servers, so why let anyone dictate how we should run > them. > > But I expect this attitude from some here, the same attitude some here use > when claiming gmail is too big to block, again, no they are not, and yes, > we have, multiple times. > Presumably you run these servers for your customers, be they the internal users of your company or just yourself in the case of personal servers... so you need to fulfil that need. I mean, you could say "we only accept mail delivery via UUCP", but that's unlikely to meet your customers' needs. In this case, there is an industry best practice for doing what they are doing. They can, of course, go their own way, but doing so will impact their users. They may understand that and make a cost-benefit analysis that still comes down to breaking the best practice (like say Y! did when they went p=reject). Or, they may just be pulling a BOFH and don't care. Or, they may benefit from learning about the best practice and the issues their users may be having, none of us have 100% visibility into the effects our operational choices have on our users. In any case, in today's world where it's mostly hosted solutions talking to other solutions, a mailing list admin has limited ability to change how their hosted mailing list solution works... and even less ability to influence someone like Google to make a work-around for some other much smaller provider who is choosing to be non-standard. After all, the BOFH is making the choice for their users, and by definition their users are a much smaller percentage of our users. No one likes maintaining some huge list of per-domain/host settings that you have no idea are still required or not, and tend to be under documented. Would I need to create an automated probe to determine whether or not they change their policy in the future? Being non-standard creates a burden on the rest of the eco-system, and the eco-system may react by ignoring you. Gmail used to implement something similar to what mail.ru is doing because it was left-over from the pre-dmarc days (ecert for those who recall)... and we equalized it years ago (around the time of the Y! change) to what we project with dmarc. We did this because of the burden and problems it had on others who didn't know we were being special and because the eco-system started adapting to dmarc and so telling others what we expected improved how others could work with us. Brandon
_______________________________________________ mailop mailing list [email protected] https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
