Re: Awful kludge removed from Conspire and SF-LUG lists

On 3/2/24 10:54 PM, Rick Moen wrote:
> Quoting Ivan Sergio Borgonovo ([email protected]):
> 
>> Up to my understanding you could
>>
>> v=DMARC1; p=none
>>
>> and then set ARC headers if you've DKIM/SPF set up properly.
>>
>> https://support.google.com/a/answer/81126?sjid=2605316202093911332-EU#zippy=%2Crequirements-for-all-senders

[...]

> It would help alleviate my growing pessimism about the benefit of
> mailing list discussion if people would actually pay attention to what I
> say, because, honestly, I covered the guts of all of this already,
> though I didn't get into ARC headers for reasons mentioned above.

> And, in particular, your well-intended remark seems to amount to
> "Hey, Google published a page of suggestions."  Yes, Ivan, I know, and
> that's why I talked about that, right here, a month ago.

I never thought reading all your emails and never repost url was a 
requirement to participate in a respectful, profitable discussion.

I took the time to chat a bit to people more knowledgeable than me and 
what I got was:

* you DON'T HAVE to have strict DMARK... so once you have SPF/DKIM 
"supporting" DMARK shouldn't be hard. Supporting DMARK is not mandatory 
but it would probably makes google happier. Probably SPF would do.

* noticed my VPS provider was magically adding ARC records even if that 
VPS doesn't run any mailinglist

* talked with some friend working there that suggested it could probably 
be related to some plesk update. Checked there was no corresponding 
plesk update when emails started to have ARC records, inferred they were 
doing it at the MTA level [*]

* checked now if this was a reasonable hypothesis... and it seems to be

https://weber.fi.eu.org/blog/Informatique/openarc_with_postfix_on_debian_10.html?lang=en

* inferred it may not require a mailman upgrade

* probably inferred right since there are some posts on stackoverflow, 
but without sufficient clarity/quality to be conclusive

Debian 10 is reasonably old so there are actually some chances that 
linuxmafia is not running something older.

I hope this sounds more helpful.

I repeat myself: I've no expectations. This is a free service, somehow 
not making money on my data, managed and financed by volunteer(s) etc...

>> BTW do we have more than 5000 subscribers that use gmail adresses?
> 
> The probable reason for your (above) question is the assumption that
> Google is telling the truth, in its claim that the full set of
> requirements onto sending SMTP domains would, at this time, be enforced
> only onto "bulk senders", ones sending Google 5000+ messages per day
> (not, BTW, 5000 individuals).

I was already counting "total number of emails sent from one source.
I just forgot that

[total number of emails sent to gmail users] =

[total number of subscribers across lists that use gmail] * [number of 
emails sent to the mailing lists by anyone]

Probably the second factor makes much easier to understand there are 
some chances that a bunch of lists with few hundreds of subscribers may 
reach 5000 mailing to gmail users.


[*] they put their MTA (postfix) in front of their clients MTA

-- 
Ivan Sergio Borgonovo
https://www.webthatworks.it https://www.borgonovo.net