Subject: [TOOLS-DEVELOPMENT] Fwd: Re: Google threatens to break Gmail

From: Lou Berger <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 08:34:14 -0400

Hello,

Does anyone know if Andy's statement correct?  Are there any plans for
this upgrade?

Thanks,
Lou
PS this  is not a thread I'm really paying too much attention to...

--- Forwarded message ---
*From: * 	Andrew G. Malis <[email-masked]>
*Date: * 	October 22, 2015 6:05:59 AM
*Subject: * 	Re: Google threatens to break Gmail
*To: * 	Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
*CC: * 	IETF Discussion Mailing List <[email-masked]>

There is an easy answer to this, that we discussed on this list over a
year ago - just bring mailman up to a more recent revision. It can
handle DMARC re-writing just fine.

Cheers,
Andy

On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 10:21 PM, Brian E Carpenter
<[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:

    On 22/10/2015 14:59, Ross Finlayson wrote:
    >> Will the problem with Mailman distribution of DMARC-contaminated
    messages
    >> be fixed in time for this,or must we gmail users start to look for a
    >> more reasonable provider?
    >
    > Or perhaps people who subscribe to IETF mailing lists can start
    doing so using more professional-looking email addresses :-)

    Um, why? We don't represent our employers here, and many people change
    jobs or even countries but prefer their IETF email to continue
    uninterrupted.
    I started using gmail precisely to avoid the problems and
    stupidities of corporate
    email, and of access across travel and relocation, and I know I'm
    not alone.

    > (Note that it’s possible, I think, to continue to use 3rd-party
    email services like ‘Gmail’ with email addresses that use your own
    domain name rather than “@gmail.com <http://gmail.com>" (and, as a
    beneficial side effect, you won’t be subject to DMARC).)

    Only, I think, if your corporate provider has made a suitable deal
    with G.

        Brian

---

From: Russ Housley <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 09:39:21 -0400

My understanding is that we are using Mailman 2.1.15.  Mailman 2.1.20 and 3.0.0 are available.  We have not asked the Secretariat to reviewed every change, but I am told that they are comfortable that Mailman 2.1.20 is fine.  We have not looked at Mailman 3.0.0 at all.

The version of Mailman beyond 2.1.15 have no capacity for sending out password reminders; it was removed.  Brian Carpenter has very loudly argued for this capability to be retained.

Russ

On Oct 22, 2015, at 8:34 AM, Lou Berger wrote:

> _______________________________________________
> TOOLS-DEVELOPMENT mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-development

---

From: Henrik Levkowetz <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 15:46:06 +0200

On 2015-10-22 15:39, Russ Housley wrote:
> My understanding is that we are using Mailman 2.1.15. Mailman 2.1.20
> and 3.0.0 are available. We have not asked the Secretariat to
> reviewed every change, but I am told that they are comfortable that
> Mailman 2.1.20 is fine. We have not looked at Mailman 3.0.0 at all.
> 
> The version of Mailman beyond 2.1.15 have no capacity for sending out
> password reminders; it was removed. Brian Carpenter has very loudly
> argued for this capability to be retained.

It looks as if 2.1.18 or later in the 2.x.x series may improve things:

	http://wiki.list.org/DEV/DMARC

Regards,

	Henrik

---

From: Glen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 06:55:49 -0700

Yes, it seems that development of the 2.1 branch continued.  Previously the
talk had been halting at 2.1.15 and going straight to 3.0.0.  (There wasn't
previously much movement on or support for Mailman; pleasantly, that
appears to have changed.)

The latest version is 2.1.20, and the .19 and .20 releases contain
bugfixes, so I would think that, if we are going to do an in-place upgrade
of Mailman, we should just go directly to .20

Since Google doesn't plan to do this until next year, there is also the
possibility that we can do the Mailman upgrade as a part of a larger
server/OS upgrade.  Timing and direction of this are still TBD.

Glen