Hi, Steve. First, apologies last night if I was a bit peeved.
It's just that I really had put quite a lot of effort into making
sure Dyne.org people and the Dng community understood the problem,
and that my recommendation was to enable a least-bad mitigation
within GNU Mailman that 'munged' _on
Result of the Debian vote
'General Resolution: Init systems and systemd'
https://www.debian.org/vote/2019/vote_002
The voting period ended on Friday 2019-12-27 23:59:59 UTC
Result
https://vote.debian.org/~secretary/gr_initsystems/results.txt
The winners are:
Option 2 "B: Systemd but we suppor
My comments:
A mediocre result, neither good nor bad.
The best option for people who don't want to use systemd, Option 6 "E: Support
for multiple init systems is Required", came in last.
But Option 1 "F: Focus on systemd" came in second place, if it had won it would
have been a tragedy.
We re
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Hi,
On 28/12/19 9:03 pm, Alexis PM via Dng wrote:
> A mediocre result, neither good nor bad. The best option for people
> who don't want to use systemd, Option 6 "E: Support for multiple
> init systems is Required", came in last. But Option 1 "F: Fo
On 28/12/2019 07:01, Steve Litt wrote:
> So, if we insist on assisting Yahoo, Gmail, Hotmail, and their ilk, and
> all their users, by incorporating DMARC
Really, it's surely not a matter of willingly helping them. It's more a
matter of survival at all in a world where they carry a significant
pro
On 28/12/2019 08:34, Rick Moen wrote:
> Are you in the middle of submitting a patch to GNU Mailman, then? I'm
> expect they will give it appropriate consideration, and give you expert
> feedback (which, possibly, the rest of us will appreciate hearing).
>
> OTOH, expecting Dyne.org people to hand-
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 29/12/19 12:01 am, Mark Rousell wrote:
> On 28/12/2019 07:01, Steve Litt wrote:
>> So, if we insist on assisting Yahoo, Gmail, Hotmail, and their
>> ilk, and all their users, by incorporating DMARC
>
> Really, it's surely not a matter of willing
On Sat, 28 Dec 2019 13:16:19 +, Mark wrote in message
<5e0755a3.80...@signal100.com>:
> That said, the mail list *does* seem to work as Steve wants.
..you almost nailed it with the above observation, I'd go
"the mail list does *seem* to work as Steve wants", which
is how and why Steve got
On 2019-12-28 5:03 a.m., Alexis PM via Dng wrote:
My comments:
A mediocre result, neither good nor bad.
The best option for people who don't want to use systemd, Option 6 "E:
Support for multiple init systems is Required", came in last.
But Option 1 "F: Focus on systemd" came in second place, i
On 28/12/2019 15:02, Arnt Karlsen wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Dec 2019 13:16:19 +, Mark wrote in message
> <5e0755a3.80...@signal100.com>:
>
>> That said, the mail list *does* seem to work as Steve wants.
> ..you almost nailed it with the above observation, I'd go
> "the mail list does *seem* to wor
Steve Litt wrote:
> ... we could at least
> change the munge string from:
>
> Firstname Lastname via Dng
>
> to:
>
> GOES TO DNG (IRT Firstname Lastname)
>
> So when you do "return to sender" and it crazily puts
> dng@lists.dyne.org in the To field, at least that To field won't be
> disguis
Hi Steve
In the DMARC FAQ, Section "Receiver Questions" they say: "If emails from
mailing lists are important to your users, you may therefore consider to
apply specific rules for emails coming from mailing lists." [1] This is
the situation right now with the DNG list: It's up to the people who do
On Sat, 28 Dec 2019 00:34:09 -0800
Rick Moen wrote:
> Are you in the middle of submitting a patch to GNU Mailman, then? I'm
> expect they will give it appropriate consideration, and give you
> expert feedback (which, possibly, the rest of us will appreciate
> hearing).
>
> OTOH, expecting Dyne
Is there a clear rule about when the sender displays as an individual,
vs "individual via DNG"?
Just during this discussion I've seen it both ways. It hasn't been a
problem for me, likely because I seldom participate (that won't always
be the case), but I can see it being a hassle for a regular
c
Quoting Mark Rousell (mark.rous...@signal100.com):
> Even without having to submit a patch or knowing the full ins and out of
> Mailman's DMARC mitigation, it strikes me that Steve's request was a
> reasonable one.
OK, cool,
I nominate you to handle everything about this situation, from this po
Quoting 'smee via Dng (dng@lists.dyne.org):
> Is there a clear rule about when the sender displays as an individual,
> vs "individual via DNG"?
Herewith, a repost:
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2018 02:02:30 -0800
From: Rick Moen
To: dng@lists.dyne.org
Subject: Dng now alters (some) posts to compensate fo
Quoting Steve Litt (sl...@troubleshooters.com):
> In my wildest imagination, I never dreamed that Mailman wouldn't give
> the admin control over the text assembly of the munged from.
Then, possibly you can suggest how.
Why don't you test your solution on a test GNU Mailman installation,
and ad
Quoting Andrew McGlashan via Dng (dng@lists.dyne.org):
> They screw up greylisting, they screw up SPF and they screw up DMARC.
They didn't screw up SPF.
If you as the domain stakeholder of an SMTP-sending domain
deterministically know and can specify in SPF's flexible spec format
for DNS TXT rec
Quoting Adrian Zaugg (devuan@mailgurgler.com):
> In the DMARC FAQ, Section "Receiver Questions" they say: "If emails from
> mailing lists are important to your users, you may therefore consider to
> apply specific rules for emails coming from mailing lists." [1] This is
> the situation right n
One note about my advice to OSI on December 1, 2018: That was, IIRC, my
earliest attempt to advise fellow GNU Mailman listadmins about how to
contend with the DMARC problem. A probably-mistaken small datum in
what I said to OSI now sticks out:
> Yahoo and Gmail are examples of sending domains w
20 matches
Mail list logo
