nanog mailing list archives
Re: Yahoo DMARC breakage
From: Larry Sheldon <LarrySheldon () cox net>
Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2014 19:12:23 -0500
On 4/9/2014 7:02 PM, Jeff Kell wrote:
On 4/9/2014 7:22 PM, Larry Sheldon wrote:On 4/9/2014 5:11 PM, bmanning () vacation karoshi com wrote:On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 05:49:27PM -0400, Jeff Kell wrote:The most "sane" out-of-mind response should only be sent *if* the out-of-mind person is named explicitly as a recipient in the RFC822 header. Anything To: somelist@somehost does not qualify :) Jeffand just how is an algorithm supposed to detect that <jeff-kell () utc edu> is a single human and not a list?It is really too bad that there is not place to put a "precedence" that the software could key on--with values like "bulk" or "junk" or "list".Headers of your message include:Precedence: list
[snip] I knew that.
Proper mail clients can provide "list links" based on the List- headers, but few if any actually do. So take your pick, but my point remains, it still retains:Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2014 18:22:51 -0500 From: Larry Sheldon <LarrySheldon () cox net> Organization: Maybe tomorrow User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0 To: <nanog () nanog org> Subject: Re: Yahoo DMARC breakageAnd I'm nowhere mentioned. I only appear in the "envelope RCPT TO:<> RFC821 header", nowhere in the RFC822 header. It's not rocket science if you have headers available (which even Outlook can see, although you have to jump through a few hoops to see them).
My point is, and was only that the ID10t's robot-responder needs only two rules (one of which is sortakinda off topic in a muchmorphed OT threadlet) are: If the Precedence is "list", "junk", or "bulk" DO NOTHING, else, if the address to which the proposed babblegram is to be sent has received a babblegram from us since the controlling file was created DO NOTHING, else, BABBLEON.
-- Requiescas in pace o email Two identifying characteristics of System Administrators: Ex turpi causa non oritur actio Infallibility, and the ability to learn from their mistakes. (Adapted from Stephen Pinker)
Current thread:
- Re: procmail, was autoresponding to Yahoo DMARC breakage, (continued)
- Re: procmail, was autoresponding to Yahoo DMARC breakage George Michaelson (Apr 09)
- Re: procmail, was autoresponding to Yahoo DMARC breakage Jack Bates (Apr 10)
- Re: procmail, was autoresponding to Yahoo DMARC breakage Miles Fidelman (Apr 10)
- Re: autoresponding to Yahoo DMARC breakage John R. Levine (Apr 09)
- Re: Yahoo DMARC breakage William Herrin (Apr 09)
- Re: Yahoo DMARC breakage Jim Popovitch (Apr 09)
- Re: autoresponding to Yahoo DMARC breakage John R. Levine (Apr 09)
- Message not available
- Re: Yahoo DMARC breakage Larry Sheldon (Apr 09)
- Re: Yahoo DMARC breakage Jeff Kell (Apr 09)
- Re: Yahoo DMARC breakage Jim Popovitch (Apr 09)
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Re: Yahoo DMARC breakage Larry Sheldon (Apr 09)
- Re: Yahoo DMARC breakage Jim Popovitch (Apr 09)
- Re: Yahoo DMARC breakage Rich Kulawiec (Apr 10)
- Re: Yahoo DMARC breakage Jay Hennigan (Apr 14)
- Re: Yahoo DMARC breakage Franck Martin (Apr 20)
- Re: Yahoo DMARC breakage Barney Wolff (Apr 20)
- Re: Yahoo DMARC breakage staticsafe (Apr 20)
- Re: Yahoo DMARC breakage Franck Martin (Apr 20)
- Re: Yahoo DMARC breakage Scott Howard (Apr 20)
- Re: Yahoo DMARC breakage Franck Martin (Apr 20)
- Re: Yahoo DMARC breakage Franck Martin (Apr 20)