www-infrastructure-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Schaefer <joe_schae...@yahoo.com.INVALID>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Y! DMARC solution preferences
Date Sun, 01 Jun 2014 23:45:58 GMT
No sebb, check the list archives on people.apache.org.  The
difference is that you received a courtesy-copy directly from
me for certain messages.



On Sunday, June 1, 2014 7:42 PM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
 

>
>
>On 2 June 2014 00:18, Joe Schaefer <joe_schaefer@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> This list strips text/html attachments for example, which would need to
>> stop.
>
>However, it does not _always_ seem to strip HTML multipart sections.
>For example, message IDs
>
>Message-ID: <1401663850.81707.YahooMailNeo@web121802.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
>and
>Message-ID: <1401664711.9264.YahooMailNeo@web121806.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
>
>in this thread have HTML alternatives, whereas the first message in
>the thread does not have an HTML alternative
>
>Perhaps a bug in ezmlm?
>
>The -x option does not affect all messages, as some people post in plain text.
>So it's not always obvious.
>
>It would also be useful to see the effect of not having the -f and -t options.
>Do any lists use -f (subject prefixing)?
>What about -t (trailers)?
>
>
>>
>> On Sunday, June 1, 2014 7:17 PM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2 June 2014 00:04, Joe Schaefer <joe_schaefer@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> board@, members@, infrastructure@, dev@httpd are fine as-is.
>>> About half of them need no changes, but many of those
>>> that do are public, like this list.
>>>
>>
>> I cannot say I have noticed a difference between infra and infra-dev.
>> What are that infra-dev feature(s) that would need to be dropped?
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sunday, June 1, 2014 7:01 PM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 1 June 2014 23:52, Joe Schaefer <joe_schaefer@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>> Talking to a few people about this privately, it seems that
>>>> there is a perception that munging Y! From headers is the
>>>> least invasive option of the two.
>>>>
>>>> But this is a brand-spanking new issue and it's hard to gauge
>>>> how service providers will react.  Y! could step back, or others
>>>> could step on board.  The only real future-proof option is to
>>>> change list configs to no longer alter content or headers, but
>>>> I want to let the community weigh in on their preferences before
>>>> taking action.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Are there examples of lists that don't change headers/content that we
>>> can look at?
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sunday, June 1, 2014 5:28 PM, Joe Schaefer
>>>> <joe_schaefer@yahoo.com.INVALID> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>If there are any questions or comments about this issue,
>>>>>let's place them on this thread.
>>>>>
>>>>>The underlying issue is that in about mid-April Yahoo! (and now AOL)
>>>>>changed their DNS-advertised DMARC policy for their domain to REJECT
>>>>> messages that fail the DMARC tests (revolving around SPF and DKIM). 
SPF
>>>>> is
>>>>>a non-issue for us currently, but DKIM is because it's a signed hash of
>>>>> various headers and the message body itself- things which some of our
>>>>> lists
>>>>> are configured to alter by choice.
>>>>>
>>>>>What the POLL offers is a choice of redress plan: either we can munge
Y!
>>>> >From addresses to avoid their DMARC policy check, or we can reconfigure
>>>>>our lists not to alter the message in any way.  It looks like Y! is
>>>>> committed
>>>>>to this policy change so the onus is on us, if we still want to ensure
Y!
>>>>> users'
>>>>>messages are deliverable to us, to change how we operate roughly 50% of
>>>>>our available lists.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>On Sunday, June 1, 2014 12:24 PM, Joe Schaefer
>>>>> <joe_schaefer@yahoo.com.INVALID> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Everyone is welcome to participate in this poll as
>>>>>>it affects a wide cross-section of the org.  Please
>>>>>>cast your vote on one of the following 2 choices:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>[ ] - enable Y! "From" and "DKIM-Signature" header munging,
>>>>>>      impacting only Y! mailing list authors in a minimal way
>>>>>>      (see THIS MESSAGE's headers for actual details of the changes)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>[ ] - change configurations to "-FXT", disabling all message munging
>>>>>>      for everyone equally
>>>>>>
>>>>>>See corresponding discussion on infrastructure@
>>>>>>for details of affected lists and more information
>>>>>>on the choices available.  Thx.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message