> On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 8:18 AM, Patrick Masotta <masottaus at yahoo.com> wrote: > > Hi Gene: > > Everything that comes from the list goes to my spam folder > > because the message looks as spam to yahoo. > > A simple filter resolves this: > > Deliver to "Inbox" if > To/CC contains "syslinux at zytor.com" > > > why is not the list sending the message as coming from the list e-mail account???? > > that's why Yahoo flags the messages as spam... > > That was actually a debate several years ago (though I can't figure > out the search to find it). It seems the best option would be for a > new version of MailMan to allow a per-subscriber option to address > this (though this would be an enhancement request for MailMan) though > the above filter should help. > > -- > -Gene > > >> Due to Yahoo!'s DMARC, you > >> probably didn't see the other two tests I > >> already sent as I didn't see this reply of > >> yours in my Yahoo! account, > >> both of which > >> appeared to be Base64 encoded (though sending to my > >> GMail they were not). I do see yours is > >> actually plain text > >> -Gene > _______________________________________________ > Syslinux mailing list > Submissions to Syslinux at zytor.com > Unsubscribe or set options at: > http://www.zytor.com/mailman/listinfo/syslinux >As per prior discussions, the "From:" field should remain with the original sender. One (important) reason is that frequent participants in the Syslinux Mailing List tend to use the "From:" field, for instance as search filter. Changing the behavior of the "Reply-To:" field might or might not improve the current situation. The problem (not only for this mailing list) is based on a change in Yahoo!'s policy, since around April 2014 (or so). This change has specially affected mailing lists. Although some email providers are "better" dealing with Yahoo!'s change, others have chosen to do nothing. For instance, users of Hotmail (and alike) participating in mailing lists are negatively affected by this change. Other less-popular email providers might be affected too. There is no easy solution. Even if some Yahoo! users avoid using it for mailing lists, there is always the chance someone might still use it (now or in the future), so, like it or not, it is up to Mailman and List Administrators to help solve/workaround the problem. FWIW, I am one of those not yet receiving the mails "forwarded" by the Syslinux Mailing List when the original sender uses some Yahoo! email address. Thank you and Regards, Ady.
> As per > prior discussions, the "From:" field should remain > with the > original sender. One (important) > reason is that frequent participants > in the > Syslinux Mailing List tend to use the "From:" > field, for > instance as search filter.Well I consider the search filter by subject is a much better approach, for participating on a conversation.>From a security point of view the logic says that the sender of an e-mailshould not use other than its own e-address as sender; it is logic people out there (yahoo) not liking a service (list) that impersonates someone else.> Changing the behavior of the "Reply-To:" > field might or might not improve the current > situation. >If the list sends a properly crafted e-mail coming from its own address and domain why do you think would be a problem?> The problem (not > only for this mailing list) is based on a change in > Yahoo!'s policy, since around April 2014 > (or so). This change has > specially affected > mailing lists. Although some email providers are > "better" dealing with Yahoo!'s > change, others have chosen to do nothing...We should stop for a sec and think if what yahoo did was good or not to fight spammers; I think it was good. A list that impersonates a sender is not a good approach.> There is no easy solution. > Even if some Yahoo! users avoid using it for > mailing lists, there is always the chance > someone might still use it > (now or in the > future), so, like it or not, it is up to Mailman and > List Administrators to help solve/workaround > the problem.Sure; I think we should adapt to this new situation. Thanks, Patrick
On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 11:11 AM, Patrick Masotta <masottaus at yahoo.com> wrote:>> As per >> prior discussions, the "From:" field should remain >> with the >> original sender. One (important) >> reason is that frequent participants >> in the >> Syslinux Mailing List tend to use the "From:" >> field, for >> instance as search filter. > > Well I consider the search filter by subject is a much better approach, > for participating on a conversation.I prefer the option. There are times it's easier to use from as a filter, sometimes with subject. GMail auto-completes these searches pretty well.> From a security point of view the logic says that the sender of an e-mail > should not use other than its own e-address as sender; it is logic > people out there (yahoo) not liking a service (list) that impersonates someone else.The impression that I get is that the people who made DMARC either voted down anyone that deals with mailing list traffic or made it with zero regard for the existence of mailing lists.>> Changing the behavior of the "Reply-To:" >> field might or might not improve the current >> situation. >> > If the list sends a properly crafted e-mail coming from its own address and domain > why do you think would be a problem? > >> The problem (not >> only for this mailing list) is based on a change in >> Yahoo!'s policy, since around April 2014 >> (or so). This change has >> specially affected >> mailing lists. Although some email providers are >> "better" dealing with Yahoo!'s >> change, others have chosen to do nothing... > > We should stop for a sec and think if what yahoo did was good or not to fight > spammers; I think it was good. A list that impersonates a sender is not a good approach.Don't confuse spammers and spoofers. This is a critical distinction. Both are commonly handled by "spam" filters. Not all spoofers are spammers (mailing list traffic; people who try to send through a local MTA due to network policies blocking their home MTA) and not all spammers are spoofers (think malware or compromised password).>> There is no easy solution. >> Even if some Yahoo! users avoid using it for >> mailing lists, there is always the chance >> someone might still use it >> (now or in the >> future), so, like it or not, it is up to Mailman and >> List Administrators to help solve/workaround >> the problem. > > Sure; I think we should adapt to this new situation.There's a philosophical issue here (though I'm having difficulty conceiving a comparable analogy) that just because 1 party decides to do something that breaks long standing practice that is effective for the vast majority of people, everyone else looses. http://www.lsoft.com/news/2014/dmarc-debacle-us.asp is an excellent example of Yahoo! shooting _itself_ in the foot, breaking its products for about one month and the "fix" causing yet more issues. In both instances, Yahoo! caused additional confusion and frustration. I can completely understand it for certain uses like vendor/customer interactions, especially over a CRM (customer relations management) solution. Also, I can completely understand MTA operators who have chosen to reject all email from source domains where messages may get relayed over a list and set "p=reject". -- -Gene