> > On May 18, 2026, at 9:44AM, Andrew C Aitchison via mailop
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 18 May 2026, Alessandro Vesely via mailop wrote:
> >
> >> On 18/05/2026 08:51, Andrew C Aitchison wrote:
> >>> Has anyone tried the StaleMARC RBL
> >>> https://measurement.network/services/stalemarc-rua-ruf-rbl/
> >>
> >>
> >> Cute!
> >>
> >> They're called RBL, but they actually work via web queries.
> >>
> >>> I get probed by them once a fortnight ?
> >>
> >> How do recognize their probing?
>
> Okay, this might be off-topic for mailop (once I resurrect some mailing
> lists, those will be the place, but that's hopefully later this week). The
> person with the abillity to make DNS changes is somewhat oversubscribed at
> the moment.
>
> ...but with the work I'm doing, right now, RUA reports in OpenDMARC are sent
> via a perl script, but RUF reports are sent directly from the C milter by
> popen() ing a pipe to sendmail. It's sounding more and more like I need to
> break RUF= reporting also into an off-board script, so it can inherit from
> all of this. And do VERP so that a future tool can back off sends the same
> way many listservs do. And perhaps customize the body text more easily.
>
> Also, http and https urls are valid url-methods for RUA/RUF, and the milter
> doesn't do them. The perl script now does, in my branch, and they don't
> suffer the bounce issue, although they don't seem to be in wide use.
Does this mean that OpenDMARC will be seeing a new release in the
near future?
https://www.github.com/trusteddomainproject/OpenDMARC
I hope so, because it's a good project, and I even tried to
contribute to it a while ago with a PostgreSQL schema (that a few
people tried and responded positively):
https://github.com/trusteddomainproject/OpenDMARC/pull/251
There haven't been any updates for a few years now, and the list of
Pull Requests doesn't seem to be leading to any merges, so I've held
back at this point with concern that the project may have been
abandoned.
> I'm also thinking just a manually maintained list of "dead report receivers"
> is useful.
If you do, please feel free to contact me privately because I'd be
happy to add any to it that you don't already have, but which bounce
for me as well.
> I'll also contact the measurement.network people and perhaps see if they need
> help putting the stalemark stuff into an actual RBL, or if they'd have a
> problem with our docs pointing at them.
FYI: I may be interested in helping with this too.
> Otherwise, I apologize for the noise. I was wrong about the pipelining thing
> causing the 45X/5XX errors in the same transaction, I sort of missed that
> feature in seeing all the *other*
> youre-a-big-huge-company-you-should-know-better dysfunction in that
> transaction.
>
> -Dan
> _______________________________________________
> mailop mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
--
Postmaster - [email protected]
Randolf Richardson, CNA - [email protected]
Inter-Corporate Computer & Network Services, Inc.
Vancouver, Beautiful British Columbia, Canada
https://www.inter-corporate.com/
_______________________________________________
mailop mailing list
[email protected]
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
