Re: Mailing lists - assumptions

On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 02:55:37PM -0500, Pete Resnick wrote:
> On 4/18/14 2:20 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> >We need to answer the question, explicitly, about whether or not the
> >sites which are currently honoring the DMARC p=reject policy can be
> >assumed to adopt whatever we come up with.
> 
> There may be sending sites that do *not* want their mail
> redistributed through mailing lists, or at least don't want their
> mail redistributed through mailing lists that don't support whatever
> the nifty new mechanism is. They'll want to say, "If you didn't get
> it directly from me, it went someplace it wasn't supposed to go." As
> goofy as I think that is, I am perfectly OK with the semantics of
> "p=reject" staying the same for those sites, and for receivers to
> honor "p=reject" by bouncing that email.
> 

So you're OK with mailing list administrators telling yahoo.com users,
if you want to continue participating on this mailing list, you'll
have to change e-mail providers?

There has already been one DMARC cheerleader saying he would stop
supporting to non-profit organizations who would do that, so that's
putting the mailing list administrators of non-profit organizations in
an impossible situation.

Those of us who are in that situation will need some forum to discuss
what's the least disruptive way to the Internet mail architecture to
address our needs.  If that's not [email protected], that's fine, but
this _is_ a real life problem that is not going away.  25% of the
governing board of my church are yahoo.com users.  I'm not sure I can
tell them all that they have to switch to gmail.com.

     	      	   	     	       - Ted

_______________________________________________
ietf-822 mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-822