You say "messages will look a little different from these users."
Can you talk more about that? Are you talking about mail service software or people reading the list? If you think there are any likely side effects to the suggested fixes, pluses and minuses it would be helpful to hear them. Btw, this is on a web host (Dreamhost) as I've mentioned. I may have access to all of these settings, I don't know yet. Anyway a little more discussion on this (to get input of the community) and then we can take it off list. This is definitely the ultimate "metadiscussion" and it may turn some members off. -- John. On Tue, May 3, 2022, 9:45 AM Joshua O'Keefe <maj...@nachomountain.com> wrote: > > On May 3, 2022, at 9:30 AM, John R. Hogerhuis <jho...@pobox.com> wrote: > > If anyone has a suggestion that I can try in Mailman I'll try it. > > Hi John, > > In my own opinion the safest thing to do is to sigh and implement one of > mailman's two header munging policies: > > Option A is: > set dmarc_mitigate_action to munge_from > set (if not already enabled, it appears to be) reply_goes_to_list > net result: mailman will look up the submitter's DMARC record, and if > policy=quarantine or policy=reject is set, munge the header; messages will > look a little different if submitted by one of those users. > > Option B is: > set dmarc_mitigate_action to munge_from > set dmarc_mitigate_unconditionally > set reply_goes_to_list > net result: mailman will always munge From: regardless of the submitter's > ESP policy; messages will look a little different. > > Option C -- leaving well enough alone -- should be on the table as well, > for a variety of reasons. > > Note also that I haven't run a mailman of my own for over a decade, well > before the publication of RFC7489. The suggested configurations are based > on doc reading and applying the lessons of running (non-mailman) mail > systems at work that deliver a million messages a day.
