[syslinux] DMARC test (request)

[Patrick Masotta]

> The impression that I get is
> that the people who made DMARC either
> voted
> down anyone that deals with mailing list traffic or made it
> with
> zero regard for the existence of
> mailing lists.

I honestly think lists sending e-mails on someone else's name
it's a bad design.
(I understand it is a controversial topic; It is not my intention here 
to discuss the philosophy behind the former sentence.)

 
 >Don't confuse spammers and spoofers.  This
 >is a critical distinction.
 >Both are commonly
 >handled by "spam" filters.  Not all spoofers
 >are
 >spammers (mailing list traffic; people
 >who try to send through a local
 >MTA due to
 >network policies blocking their home MTA) and not all
 >spammers are spoofers (think malware or
 >compromised password).
 
You are right, Yahoo recent change fights spoofers,
the ones that are all spammers except lists.
Yahoo thinks that any kind of spoofing is 
bad. I agree with them; making distinctions here 
would only weaken any anti-spoofing strategy

 
> There's a philosophical
> issue here (though I'm having difficulty
> conceiving a comparable analogy) that just
> because 1 party decides to
> do something that
> breaks long standing practice that is effective for
> the vast majority of people, everyone else
> looses.
>
Smoking was loved by millions but it is bad,
smokers are today forced to quit or have an every day 
harder life. Why? because smoking kill people...

 
> http://www.lsoft.com/news/2014/dmarc-debacle-us.asp
> is an excellent example of Yahoo! shooting _itself_ in the foot, 

I'm not a Yahoo fan; I'm just using yahoo e-mail because 
I do not want to use the search engine and the web-mail
owned by the same company.

> I can
> completely understand it for certain uses like
> vendor/customer
> interactions, especially
> over a CRM (customer relations management)
> solution.  Also, I can completely understand
> MTA operators who have
> chosen to reject all
> email from source domains where messages may get
> relayed over a list and set
> "p=reject".
 
I think it's the way to go; we (lists) are the ones that have to adapt.
just only my 2 cents.

Best,
Patrick