Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC-Compliant Mailing Lists

2021-10-10 Thread Scott Kitterman
How, pray tell, shall the IETF enforce it's will upon those who fail to see the light? For a historical parallel, I would invite you to research the IETF's historical view on Network Address Translation (NAT) for IPv4 and it's effectiveness on influencing the operational use of NAT. Scott K O

Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC-Compliant Mailing Lists

2021-10-10 Thread Douglas Foster
This is disappointing and problematic. So, AOL publishes a policy which says that they do not want their outbound messages altered in transit, and implements filtering which demonstrates that they do not want inbound messages modified in transit. In opposition, we have mailing lists that claim an

[dmarc-ietf] Messages from the dmarc list for the week ending Sun Oct 10 06:00:40 2021

2021-10-10 Thread John Levine
Count| Bytes | Who ++--- 67 ( 100%) | 516590 ( 100%) | Total 14 (20.9%) | 93140 (18.0%) | Dave Crocker 13 (19.4%) | 83504 (16.2%) | Scott Kitterman 11 (16.4%) | 135373 (26.2%) | Douglas Foster 10 (14.9%) | 66943 (13.0%) | Alessandro Vesel

Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC-Compliant Mailing Lists

2021-10-10 Thread John, come on
On Sat 09/Oct/2021 21:12:40 +0200 Definitely Alessandro Vesely no question wrote: It appears that Alessandro Vesely said: Would it make sense to extend DMARC commitment to the whole From: field? For example, assert that the local part and the display name have been set by an authenticated u