[170990] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: DMARC -> CERT?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (rwebb@ropeguru.com)
Mon Apr 14 17:44:21 2014
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2014 17:39:44 -0400
In-Reply-To: <534C52C7.3040602@meetinghouse.net>
From: "rwebb@ropeguru.com" <rwebb@ropeguru.com>
To: "Miles Fidelman" <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Plus I guarantee that something this SIGNIFICANT would catch the attention =
of many tech news outlets, social sites, and many email lists if they had g=
iven due notice and allowed people time to digest the change. But, I guess =
since everything except their email has become pretty much irrelevant these=
days, they had to do something to get attention and try to be the big bull=
y again.
I personally run only a couple of small email lists in which the subscriber=
s are specifically added by me when someone wants on, and this has caused u=
s, because the submitter has a long time Yahoo email address and will not =
change, a huge headache. The sender has had to resort to sending email from=
Yahoo account multiple time in order to get the emails out to the 180+ sub=
scribers. Some people cannot change their email due to having it for so lon=
g it is just not practical. Only other work around I have for this user is =
to give them a private email list on the email server where he can send fro=
m that is not a Yahoo address. This causes extra work because every email h=
e wants to forward on, he must now first send it to the new private address=
, then login to the private email address web mail, then forward.
I have to agree with this others out there that Yahoo SHOULD, not COULD, ha=
ve handled this a lot better. All the other big ISP's out there should be w=
hipping Yahoo's a$$ about right now. But as usual, not a peep!
Robert
-----Original Message-----
From: Miles Fidelman [mailto:mfidelman@meetinghouse.net]
Sent: Monday, April 14, 2014 5:28 PM
Cc: NANOG
Subject: Re: DMARC -> CERT?
Christopher Morrow wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 4:44 PM, Scott Howard <scott@doc.net.au> wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 1:39 PM, Christopher Morrow
>> <morrowc.lists@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Matthias Leisi <matthias@leisi.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>> They could have communicated, as in "listen folks, we are going to
>>>> make a critical change that will affect mailing lists (etc...) in
>>>> four weeks time".
>>> communicated it where?
>>
>> "The Internet".
> I was trying, really, to be not-funny with my question.
>
> if you're going to do something that has the potential to affect (say,
> for example) email to a wide set of people, most of which are NOT your
> direct users, how do you go about making that public?
>
> 'the internet' isn't really a good answer for 'how do you notify'.
> Doug's note that: "email mailops" is good... but I'm not sure how many
> people that run lists listen to mailops? (I don't ... i don't run any
> big list, but...)
>
> I also wonder about update cycles for software in this realm? and for
> very larger list operators there's probably some customization and
> such to hurdle over on the upgrade path, eh? so how much leadtime is
> enough? how much is too much? 1yr seems like a long time - people will
> forget, 1wk doesn't seem like enough to avoid firedrills and
> un-intended bugs.
>
>> A blog entry and a post to a few key relevant mailing lists would have
> specifically which mail-lists?
>
>
How about the support lists for all the email list packages they could
think of - let's start with mailman, majordomo, listserve, listproc,
sympa, ezmlm, .....
Might have been nice if they'd offered some support for patching the
open source ones.
Miles Fidelman
--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is. .... Yogi Berra
