Subject: [v6ops] Fwd: Bounce action notification

From: Fred Baker <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2017 11:31:51 -0700

Over the past few months, the chairs have seen quite a number of messages like this. An inquiry to AMS (who manages IETF mailing lists) tells us that this mostly has to do with corporate policies around security, bouncing messages that lack a specific header, or have it, or have it and it's wrong. Specifically:

On Jul 18, 2017, at 7:22 AM, Glen <[email-masked]> wrote:
> Not a glitch, and not anything that happened with the mailing lists.
> 
> Alas, this is a case where Yahoo had implemented a very hard-reject
> policy against SPF violations, and I suspect what's happened is that
> they've now "extended" that policy to their foreign servers.  We've
> known for quite some time that nobody @yahoo.com can effectively
> participate in any mailing lists (anywhere) because of this - now it
> seems that everyone at @yahoo.* is also affected by this.
> 
> http://www.pcworld.com/article/2141120/yahoo-email-antispoofing-policy-breaks-mailing-lists.html
> et al
> 
> There is not, alas, anything I can do.  You might wish to warn - by
> direct email - your @yahoo.* users about this; on the other hand, they
> probably already know.  They're going to need to move to Google, or
> any other, more sane ISP that doesn't have the cavalier attitude Yahoo
> does towards their users.

Also, at least with IPv6 addresses, there is an additional issue with PTR records (reverse DNS). Note that PTR records in IPv6 are non-trivial; if I get a lookup for 2001:db8::1's name ([email-masked]), the name server pretty much needs to ping the address (because it might be a temporary address or an address in a prefix allocated to a host), and in the event of a response, *create* a valid PTR record. There is little chance with SLAAC+privacy for a PTR record to be predefined.

Just looking at the population of the list, I think it's possible that we have lost 250 people in 2017. 

Now, if that's 250 people who now have different addresses or should have dropped off the list and are now ignoring it, so be it. But If you know of people who are wondering what's up with the list, this is a place they should check.

> Begin forwarded message:
> 
> From: [email-masked]
> Subject: Bounce action notification
> Date: September 27, 2017 at 11:10:39 AM PDT
> To: [email-masked]
> 
> This is a Mailman mailing list bounce action notice:
> 
>    List:       v6ops
>    Member:     [email-masked]
>    Action:     Subscription disabled.
>    Reason:     Excessive or fatal bounces.
> 
> 
> 
> The triggering bounce notice is attached below.
> 
> Questions? Contact the Mailman site administrator at [email-masked].
> 
> From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <[email-masked]>
> Subject: Returned mail: see transcript for details
> Date: September 27, 2017 at 11:09:04 AM PDT
> To: <[email-masked]>
> 
> 
> The original message was received at Wed, 27 Sep 2017 14:09:04 -0400
> from mail.ietf.org [4.31.198.44]
> 
>   ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----
> <[email-masked]>
>    (reason: 554 5.7.9 Message not accepted for policy reasons.  See https://help.yahoo.com/kb/postmaster/SLN7253.html)
> 
>   ----- Transcript of session follows -----
> ... while talking to mx-sbc.mail.am0.yahoodns.net.:
>>>> DATA
> <<< 554 5.7.9 Message not accepted for policy reasons.  See https://help.yahoo.com/kb/postmaster/SLN7253.html
> 554 5.0.0 Service unavailable
> Reporting-MTA: dns; alpd683.prodigy.net
> Received-From-MTA: DNS; mail.ietf.org
> Arrival-Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2017 14:09:04 -0400
> 
> Final-Recipient: RFC822; [email-masked]
> Action: failed
> Status: 5.0.0
> Remote-MTA: DNS; mx-sbc.mail.am0.yahoodns.net
> Diagnostic-Code: SMTP; 554 5.7.9 Message not accepted for policy reasons.  See https://help.yahoo.com/kb/postmaster/SLN7253.html
> Last-Attempt-Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2017 14:09:04 -0400
> X-Originating-IP: [4.31.198.44]
> Received: from mail.ietf.org (mail.ietf.org [4.31.198.44])
> 	by alpd683.prodigy.net (8.14.4 IN altR5 TLS/8.14.4) with ESMTP id v8RI92rC049329
> 	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO)
> 	for <[email-masked]>; Wed, 27 Sep 2017 14:09:04 -0400
> Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1])
> 	by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E724E134ED7;
> 	Wed, 27 Sep 2017 11:09:01 -0700 (PDT)
> DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1;
> 	t=1506535742; bh=7O1wOFMrwUQIVvh8nID+3KjOu472rwlpAthFrAj+WV8=;
> 	h=From:Date:References:To:In-Reply-To:Subject:List-Id:
> 	 List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe;
> 	b=a7zJliNYLQ+x40LGqH74rJJ39oECp9t4irpT987QBFpmgqYfTpummrqFeOA+ZBgbI
> 	 cJHsk8L7cQmI34TZDlOSxNbsmhwyJFoTFrioV7hrEknlTkbXqIt256a3laWkQVKvJW
> 	 7tpmsz8YVkE6FOL5ngNwve+bUi0Gky+dxNGlH2RU=
> X-Original-To: [email-masked]
> Delivered-To: [email-masked]
> Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
> by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDC0B134ED5
> for <[email-masked]>; Wed, 27 Sep 2017 11:08:59 -0700 (PDT)
> X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
> X-Spam-Flag: NO
> X-Spam-Score: -2
> X-Spam-Level: 
> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 
> DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1,
> HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
> Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
> header.d=google.com
> Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44])
> by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
> with ESMTP id HuWSrkXU3HZm for <[email-masked]>;
> Wed, 27 Sep 2017 11:08:58 -0700 (PDT)
> Received: from mail-pf0-x229.google.com (mail-pf0-x229.google.com
> [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::229])
> (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
> (No client certificate requested)
> by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B3BF7134ED7
> for <[email-masked]>; Wed, 27 Sep 2017 11:08:58 -0700 (PDT)
> Received: by mail-pf0-x229.google.com with SMTP id x78so7630887pff.10
> for <[email-masked]>; Wed, 27 Sep 2017 11:08:58 -0700 (PDT)
> DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025;
> h=from:mime-version:subject:date:references:to:in-reply-to:message-id;
> bh=Fj3KBUue1ANgZbE5qhG9gzklnXhtsvZ2vE65RDSi/Hs=;
> b=sPbKHyqWhjkRiC1Xzpa96sJfyXu1VkRMcfW0FRUkaK1FRUlEh8ombF4C/l505Etdcz
> Hw6LRMs1udLUE0Zy9n99tg6esNPa2YRByMjryjwrPvZGvwdFbCwDsCCj5Jh/bNV94hP0
> tRTr3Q05PWaxq6OkaX7whw+0lDrhXORuPMkQQPkM0fo2AqRYjuZ3ekQOHGeNf6WHp8Jp
> 37i5rF7GU4IBRWRhTV1YOs7+ib1nc9z/dblEfY0zHxbs73jszTmHkWaJ4+KxuGZchf+j
> hjyMb7BbeK332rOqtjL0azg9PmGi4F1CIZ5BMsbxv41gZsa5yJlYMqR//nmFhZgRSm3D
> UpBQ==
> X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
> d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
> h=x-gm-message-state:from:mime-version:subject:date:references:to
> :in-reply-to:message-id;
> bh=Fj3KBUue1ANgZbE5qhG9gzklnXhtsvZ2vE65RDSi/Hs=;
> b=izy3kQjcNyNB/ok5z8+ec7HP+lxwVAzdJjHiA/f9tGcfJy7xJF0JbLYc0//gVx/qrS
> EA8nv4T89KAcOEbblaZnu8SmzUaNUWjATeMJAiS8VC34XQVsmWEeBCgSjVxjEq1kSMy6
> ZRTB/XhA9W/xS9IrgGjZOTTshT4CkEOCxHbBuv6xl7R7PO5eEvX2t0c3y+0CqsbrhpvE
> NBROFIN1Q+arwNAu8ApZcE3nrXz3sCErM1Wh3HQAMGJjzRN5D0toKk/HSI0/H+glJEcZ
> kF3LQzIsm/Hf+JUfM2mzU0LruMIrj6FaWVcdO4IEVsGQaKauC0ehwIj6vXT8xjCnzrSv
> +L/Q==
> X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUj8yzWERS1285NvucRrrEoEJSnTDUsGvaRpeQlDKnvNf1iqYTmQ
> MDDf8Vig5C1TG3boXCOo40y0zjAqaYs=
> X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QDWN2SBPVT0t2T8mxQBgWQ8eUwWOKqWepL3D4ViHAdPWlKlMFdKlDjsJx+X0UFIS2av+NhmYQ==
> X-Received: by 10.99.95.204 with SMTP id t195mr2022404pgb.68.1506535737647;
> Wed, 27 Sep 2017 11:08:57 -0700 (PDT)
> Received: from ?IPv6:2620::10e7:10:a888:544a:118b:9f49?
> ([2620:0:10e7:10:a888:544a:118b:9f49])
> by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i189sm11424564pfg.159.2017.09.27.11.08.56
> for <[email-masked]>
> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
> Wed, 27 Sep 2017 11:08:57 -0700 (PDT)
> From: james woodyatt <[email-masked]>
> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
> Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2017 11:08:55 -0700
> References: <[email-masked]>
> <[email-masked]>
> <[email-masked]>
> To: IPv6 Ops WG <[email-masked]>
> In-Reply-To: <[email-masked]>
> Message-Id: <[email-masked]>
> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
> Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/olObdk7kM-E30JbTDGx83B-AgKQ>
> Subject: Re: [v6ops] 464xlat case study (was reclassify 464XLAT as standard
> instead of info)
> X-BeenThere: [email-masked]
> X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
> Precedence: list
> List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>,
> <mailto:[email-masked]?subject=unsubscribe>
> List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/v6ops/>
> List-Post: <mailto:[email-masked]>
> List-Help: <mailto:[email-masked]?subject=help>
> List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>,
> <mailto:[email-masked]?subject=subscribe>
> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4354726816291152007=="
> Errors-To: [email-masked]
> Sender: "v6ops" <[email-masked]>
> 
>