Subject: [dmarc-ietf] Cataloging MLM manipulations of messages

From: Steve Jones <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2014 14:01:59 -0700

Somebody suggested that we should catalog common manipulations that MLMs 
perform on the messages they handle. I took a first pass but it would 
surely benefit from wider review and input.

I've put what I have so far on the DMARC WG wiki, as that seemed like a 
more convenient way to maintain it. Commentary is welcome here on the 
mailing list, and anybody who has registered can access the wiki to make 
changes or log comments.

      Link: 
http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/dmarc/trac/wiki/MilestoneOneWiki/MLM-Manipulations

Is this useful? Hopeless? Somewhere in between?

Milestone 1 editors & chairs: If this not to your liking, please move as 
appropriate or advise as necessary.

--Steve.

---

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2014 14:12:46 -0700

> Is this useful? Hopeless? Somewhere in between?

/Very/ useful, IMO.

I suggest that we target developing this -- with assistance from the
rest of the email community -- and eventually publish it as an
informational RFC.

Its utility probably goes beyond DMARC and might provide a reference for
other discussions about mailing list behavior.

d/
-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net

---

From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 02:09:21 +0900

> > Is this useful? Hopeless? Somewhere in between?

FWIW I am planning something similar, mining the archives here for
suggestions for dealing with specific indirect mail issues.
Mailing lists are my main area of expertise, so your work will
complement mine.

I'm wondering about the structure of such documents.  Is it better to
have separate pages or sections for them?

 > rest of the email community -- and eventually publish it as an

I suspect such a thing will quickly become obsolete.  I know that GNU
Mailman, historically a "pure" mailing list manager, is gradually
heading in the direction of an "enterprise communications solution",
with a message store that can be accessed or added to from the web,
mail, NNTP, or what have you.  As it becomes more flexible in those
ways, I suspect we're going to see more "semantic mail" (to coin a
phrase) aspects.

I'm not against it in principle, but I wonder if it's worth the
effort.

---

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 10:13:31 -0700

On 9/23/2014 10:09 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> I suspect such a thing will quickly become obsolete. 

I'm sure it will.  The point is that I think it can have utility to get
folks thinking in terms of a potentially wide /range/ of choice, with
the document giving a snapshot in time of choices that have been made.

d/