[dmarc-discuss] Google & IPv6 SPF check
MH Michael Hammer (5304)
MHammer at ag.com
Tue Jun 12 07:41:50 PDT 2012
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dmarc-discuss-bounces at blackops.org [mailto:dmarc-discuss-
> bounces at blackops.org] On Behalf Of Scott Kitterman
> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 10:28 AM
> To: dmarc-discuss at dmarc.org
> Subject: Re: [dmarc-discuss] Google & IPv6 SPF check
> On Tuesday, June 12, 2012 02:02:47 PM Franck Martin wrote:
> > This list will never succeed to keep DKIM intact because it adds
> > [dmarc-discuss] to the subject line. Most lists operate that way.
> > From: Tim Draegen <tdraegen at agari.com<mailto:tdraegen at agari.com>>
> > Date: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 6:40
> > To: Franck Martin
<fmartin at linkedin.com<mailto:fmartin at linkedin.com>>
> > Cc: "MH Michael Hammer (5304)"
> > <MHammer at ag.com<mailto:MHammer at ag.com>>,
> > "dmarc-discuss at dmarc.org<mailto:dmarc-discuss at dmarc.org>"
> > <dmarc-discuss at dmarc.org<mailto:dmarc-discuss at dmarc.org>> Subject:
> > [dmarc-discuss] Google & IPv6 SPF check
> > Mike, your first route:
> > 1) Attempt to leave the DKIM signature intact as the list
> handles mail.
> > Ensuring an SPF pass would be a non-starter as far as I can tell.
> > ..could be viable, too. I'm having a hard time understanding how a
> > modern mailing list would do this, though, as all of them decorate
> > messages with headers, footers, siders, etc. to let you know what
> service you're using.
> Which gets back to John Levine's point that mailing lists do what they
> do and there's not a lot of point in trying to remake them.
> The simplest thing from a DMARC perspective that a mailing list could
> do would be to rewrite the body From to something in the mailing
> domain. Then it's their DMARC/DKIM/SPF status that matters and not
> sending domain's.
> Don't hold your breath though.
> Scott K
I kind of agree with Scott and John but I think the exercise is still a
useful one. I also prefer the list taking responsibility for their
DMARC/DKIM/SPF status. I included trying to preserve DKIM because I
think it's possible although the other approach makes more sense to me.
More information about the dmarc-discuss