Mail Archive of the old Santa Clara Valley Lutheran Parish

Subject: Re: [SCVLP] Fwd: Pr. Manda's invite

Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 20:24:03 -0700 (GMT-07:00)

From: Randy Presuhn <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>

X-Received: by 10.66.182.162 with SMTP id ef2mr5619642pac.40.1398482644121;
        Fri, 25 Apr 2014 20:24:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: scvlp@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.50.143.76 with SMTP id sc12ls612479igb.30.canary; Fri, 25 Apr
 2014 20:24:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.66.137.105 with SMTP id qh9mr5976141pab.30.1398482643715;
        Fri, 25 Apr 2014 20:24:03 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>
Received: from elasmtp-kukur.atl.sa.earthlink.net (elasmtp-kukur.atl.sa.earthlink.net. [209.86.89.65])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id r61si1301370yhf.1.2014.04.25.20.24.03
        for <scvlp@googlegroups.com>;
        Fri, 25 Apr 2014 20:24:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: none (google.com: randy_presuhn@mindspring.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) client-ip=209.86.89.65;
Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com;
       spf=neutral (google.com: randy_presuhn@mindspring.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) smtp.mail=randy_presuhn@mindspring.com
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
  s=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com;
  b=BgSd/w/xiLaqRuGMmAkdTx8C0m+Esj1Wo0Dsfa8U98QDeTks1YVTrVU9ADgkePfJ;
  h=Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:To:Subject:Cc:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP;
Received: from [209.86.224.52] (helo=mswamui-valley.atl.sa.earthlink.net)
	by elasmtp-kukur.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67)
	(envelope-from <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>)
	id 1WdtDf-0002cX-55; Fri, 25 Apr 2014 23:24:03 -0400
Received: from 76.254.55.64 by webmail.earthlink.net with HTTP; Fri, 25 Apr 2014 23:24:02 -0400
Message-ID: <5451326.1398482643163.JavaMail.root@mswamui-valley.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 20:24:03 -0700 (GMT-07:00)
From: Randy Presuhn <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>
Reply-To: Randy Presuhn <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>
To: scvlp@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [SCVLP] Fwd: Pr. Manda's invite
Cc: pastor-anne@newcreationchurch-sj.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: EarthLink Zoo Mail 1.0
X-ELNK-Trace: 4488c18417c9426da92b9037bc8bcf44d4c20f6b8d69d88891b749bef7332bbc69021830386cd3fec47fdaf04d4f3d1f350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
X-Originating-IP: 209.86.224.52

Hi -

>From: Pastor Anne Carlson <pastor-anne@newcreationchurch-sj.org>
>Sent: Apr 25, 2014 6:44 PM
>To: SCVLP group <scvlp@googlegroups.com>
>Subject: [SCVLP] Fwd: Pr. Manda's invite
>
>I have no indication that this wet out, so will try again.  If you are
>getting this twice, please forgive me.
...

Yes, it did go out.  It's harder to know how many folks actually
received it.

Warning: nerd rant follows!

In recent weeks, Yahoo and AOL have started using a technique
called DMARC in a way that can cause email to not be delivered
to mailing list subscribers whose ISPs also employ DMARC.
The side effects can be much worse: it can actually cause
subscribers (other than the one who sent the message)
to be removed from a mailing list.  That is, this action
by Yahoo and AOL can mess things up badly for mailing list
users who are no way associated with either firm!

But there's more bad news.  Depending on exactly how things
are implemented and configured, it may also adversely affect
people receiving email at an alias or through a forwarding
service, as do several of the people on this mailing list.

This has caused considerable consternation in the IETF,
the organization responsible for the relevant email
standards, for three major reasons.  First, the DMARC folks
claimed in their PR materials that this was an IETF standard.
It is not.  Secondly, Yahoo's use of DMARC has caused
considerable damage to the IETF's operations which rely
heavily on mailing lists.  Thirdly, many IETF participants,
like me, run email discussion lists for their employers or
pro bono, and are dealing with the aftermath, which will
only get worse if other providers adopt Yahoo's policy.

Industry speculation has been that since the likely fallout
of these problems would be to force smaller competitors and
non-profit mailing list providers out of the business, shifting
the demand onto "social network" technologies, Yahoo and AOL
(along with the other members of the cartel that came up with
DMARC) have little reason to change.

There is also speculation that their actions may in violation of
EU and US law (under different statutes and lines of reasoning)
but there's so far been no sign of the relevant governments
taking action.  It's rumored that this lack of action may be
motivated by the likelihood that centralized social media
technologies (concentrated among a much smaller set of providers)
would be easier to monitor.

Some media coverage:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2141120/yahoo-email-antispoofing-policy-breaks-mailing-lists.html

We return now to our regularly scheduled programming...

Randy