Re: responding to DMARC breakage

[Jim Popovitch <jimpop () gmail com>]

On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Miles Fidelman
<mfidelman () meetinghouse net> wrote:
> Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu wrote:
> > On Sat, 12 Apr 2014 10:12:09 -0400, Miles Fidelman said:
> >
> > > It occurs to me that Yahoo's deployment of DMARC p=reject, and the
> > > choice of several big mail operators to honor that, has created a
> > > situation not unlike a really routing table or nameserver, snafu ---
> >
> > It's more like a peering war.  Time for somebody to either bake a cake,
> > or find alternate transit providers.
>
>
> Aaargghhh - what a horrible, but accurate analogy.  Worse probably - more
> like a peering war with a large broadband carrier, at the edge, where it's
> harder to find alternate transport.
>
> Sigh..

Taking things a bit deeper... someone needs to get a legal opinion wrt
the DMARC group's effort to have all mailinglists change their From:
address.  A legal opinion needs to be drawn on any new culpability
nanog.org (or other mailinglists) would have when the list now "owns"
the message that is being distributed.   As it is now, there is
acceptance that my posts are my content and the words there in are my
responsibility.   What happens when my text starts showing up as
From:asdfadasfadfdsa () nanog org ?

-Jim P.