Re: [dispatch] Discussion about draft-benecke-cfbl-address-header

Hi John. Thanks for your feedback.
We're currently not belonging to the M3AAWG, we may working on this
later the year.

I would be more than happy if you could introduce this to the M3AAWG.

Best,
Jan-Philipp

Am 15.01.22 um 00:43 schrieb John Levine:
> Hi.  The ietf-smtp list is the right place to discuss mail extensions.
> I'm sending replies there and will send some more substantive comments.
>
> But before that, do you belong to M3AAWG? That's where the people who
> you would want to implement this are. The one-click unsubscribe
> originated in M3AAWG discussions, so by the time it got to the IETF,
> we knew that mail providers would likely implement it. I can make
> introductions if you'd like.
>
> Regards,
> John Levine, [email protected], Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
> Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
>
>
>
> It appears that Jan-Philipp Benecke <[email protected]> said:
>> Hey dispatch wg!
>>
>> First of all, I would like to introduce myself briefly:
>> My name is Jan-Philipp Benecke, i work as a Deliverability & Software
>> Engineer at CleverReach GmbH & Co.KG.
>> We're a email marketing provider offering a software-as-a-service for
>> sending email campaigns and transactional mails.
>> This is my first IETF related work, so i'm a newbie when coming to this :)
>>
>> I want to introduce you my email-related draft "Complaint Feedback Loop
>> Address Header" which can be found @
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-benecke-cfbl-address-header/.
>> The intention of this draft is to have documented, standardized and
>> automated way to provide a so called complaint feedback loop address to
>> mailbox providers.
>> Currently, providing and maintaining such an address is a manual and
>> time-consuming process for both sides, email senders and mailbox providers.
>> This draft defines the required header, how the header needs to be
>> processed and signed by DKIM.
>>
>> Now i want to kick off a discussion around the draft and collect
>> feedback. This draft has already been presented to the ISE, Adrian
>> advised me to introduce the draft to this wg for further review and
>> discussion.
>>
>> There has been already a heavy discussion while writing within the
>> Certified Senders Alliance (https://certified-senders.eu/), which is an
>> association of mailbox providers and senders.
>> The conclusion of this discussion was that a larger majority is
>> interested in such an automated path.
>> For example, 1&1 Mail & Media, the company behind web.de/gmx.de/mail.com
>> (major mailbox provider in Germany), is very interested in this draft
>> and would be happy to have this.
>> The same feedback i already got from some email senders i'm in contact with.
>>
>> I look forward to hear your feedback about this draft.
>>
>> Best,
>> Jan-Philipp