From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received-SPF: Pass (sender SPF authorized) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::331; helo=mail-wm1-x331.google.com; envelope-from=leif.lindholm@linaro.org; receiver=edk2-devel@lists.01.org Received: from mail-wm1-x331.google.com (mail-wm1-x331.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::331]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 465EC21A07A80 for ; Tue, 30 Oct 2018 01:50:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wm1-x331.google.com with SMTP id y140-v6so11349488wmd.0 for ; Tue, 30 Oct 2018 01:50:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=vmnCMYCvyqry300/FOFm5o3jZq0HVW80bUwJ0KehxW8=; b=W27VUP6L4aZyoj+poFnrdKVrhtBSMqYSft67W8YGQI7S/O30M3o9Wb1DZU8/6hV9wW j56cwIJYKdmwk+d37AXdWtENLELImHFn84PYP1sb4E/YB+tBkYxbn7hV8c/F/iMvtmAg yYTFo+YJ9JK17pN7+tQjB8NvvK+DpdJ1FBm2s= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=vmnCMYCvyqry300/FOFm5o3jZq0HVW80bUwJ0KehxW8=; b=LzC8fNDlbRGaCKBSzjJz+v1dM0GIWCKSTK0DXqE+iV+FRSIcjSpAuLoj54p6oWZm1R 065ESi2F/FeIp5IDHer4aLXQo2i8AUiJvM6PxsJJFWFBUHLs9FLOUREZB9K5s3tdIAUq kXyb9WThKqv4D7fnz+tjx7gwFatK40xVWJO3motLtEJHhhAPd7l878TJZ3mC8UP4+IYj 1X3drwLlK5oeKrU3ZXhTK8OoK+b8WL3npy1MUF0fi6EeLg5E2QinZNPz4o6fMX/FULD5 t7wMP+R9ADqn/gMSfjUdoPv8FzOUmgkKUonoDjuYe6pS7riG+YnVg6Lx9fNpX+xih7Hx PNSg== X-Gm-Message-State: AGRZ1gKuZMEErGiZE2YD8+4w0+twNgp9cTB/Gfay2UwzKje5VnDiyl/J KePSUVP7w369xBfzS0NAEG456w== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AJdET5eO8S7/cyPIMgoBNtcw8U2TKzTZLgoSuvtiDlOc+yrqGMJ5BaSfbYOMv1QkOpZ7lXkepBiW6g== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:b7c1:: with SMTP id h184-v6mr988867wmf.33.1540889400407; Tue, 30 Oct 2018 01:50:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bivouac.eciton.net (bivouac.eciton.net. [2a00:1098:0:86:1000:23:0:2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l14-v6sm19486892wmd.43.2018.10.30.01.49.59 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Tue, 30 Oct 2018 01:49:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2018 08:49:57 +0000 From: Leif Lindholm To: "Kinney, Michael D" Cc: EDK II Development , "Cetola, Stephano" Message-ID: <20181030084957.yj5i66vczfu2cs5y@bivouac.eciton.net> References: <20181029195415.t63zjpz6byuveqne@bivouac.eciton.net> <20181029204016.yeweqvts2cnsbulz@bivouac.eciton.net> <20181029211003.4sz5vwzvldveiev5@bivouac.eciton.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Subject: Re: ** NOTICE ** edk2-devel mailing list configuration changes X-BeenThere: edk2-devel@lists.01.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: EDK II Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2018 08:50:02 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Hi Mike, That resolves the issue at my end, thanks!. But it would be good to know how it works for others (does Intel have a default mail client config, and could someone else verify the behaviour is how you would normally expect?). Regards, Leif On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 10:40:06PM +0000, Kinney, Michael D wrote: > Hi Leif, > > I can put the reply_goes_to_list option back to "Poster". > > In that configuration, a user that has a DMARC policy of > reject will still have their from address munged. > > But I noticed that the edk2-devel mailing list is not > present when anyone does a Reply-all to an email with > a munged from address. That implied to me that everyone > would need to check if the edk2-devel mailing has been > removed from a Reply-all and add it back manually. This > also seems like a non-ideal configuration option. > > However, the behavior I am seeing could be due to some > of my client settings. > > So I will put the reply_goes_to_list option back to > "Poster". > > Mike > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Leif Lindholm [mailto:leif.lindholm@linaro.org] > > Sent: Monday, October 29, 2018 2:10 PM > > To: Kinney, Michael D > > Cc: EDK II Development ; > > Cetola, Stephano > > Subject: Re: [edk2] ** NOTICE ** edk2-devel mailing list > > configuration changes > > > > Hi Mike, > > > > I could hypothesise about which email client you may be > > using :) > > > > But let me instead mention that the two email clients I > > have (mutt and > > gmail web interface) behave identically - neither adds > > the original > > sender to cc when the list server forces a reply-to > > header. > > > > Regards, > > > > Leif > > > > On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 08:49:09PM +0000, Kinney, > > Michael D wrote: > > > Leif, > > > > > > Very strange. When I do the same on that email, it > > > shows Paul on the To address line. > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Leif Lindholm > > [mailto:leif.lindholm@linaro.org] > > > > Sent: Monday, October 29, 2018 1:40 PM > > > > To: Kinney, Michael D > > > > Cc: EDK II Development ; > > > > Cetola, Stephano > > > > Subject: Re: [edk2] ** NOTICE ** edk2-devel mailing > > list > > > > configuration changes > > > > > > > > Hi Mike, > > > > > > > > When I try to "reply-to", the email from Paul A > > Lohr, > > > > sent 10 minutes > > > > after your one below, he does not show up in either > > "to" > > > > or "cc". > > > > > > > > OK, I missed the excitement during the plugfest. > > I'll go > > > > back and see > > > > what I can find there. > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > Leif > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 08:23:43PM +0000, Kinney, > > > > Michael D wrote: > > > > > Leif, > > > > > > > > > > I have enabled a different configuration setting > > > > > that should be better. > > > > > > > > > > Please try some emails and let me know if there > > > > > are any impacts. > > > > > > > > > > The reason for these changes is the DMARC related > > > > > issue that occurred on 10-19-2018 that required a > > > > > number of users to be disabled. The goal of these > > > > > changes is to enable those users to be re- > > activated. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: Leif Lindholm > > > > [mailto:leif.lindholm@linaro.org] > > > > > > Sent: Monday, October 29, 2018 12:54 PM > > > > > > To: EDK II Development > > > > > > Cc: Kinney, Michael D > > ; > > > > > > Cetola, Stephano > > > > > > Subject: Re: [edk2] ** NOTICE ** edk2-devel > > mailing > > > > list > > > > > > configuration changes > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Mike, > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 06:42:44PM +0000, > > Kinney, > > > > > > Michael D wrote: > > > > > > > Some configuration changes have been made to > > > > > > > the edk2-devel mailing list to handle posts > > from > > > > > > > a domain with a DMARC Reject/Quarantine policy > > > > > > > enabled. If this is detected then the from > > address > > > > > > > is now munged. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One side effect of this setting is that the > > > > > > > behavior of Reply has changed. Instead of > > being > > > > > > > a reply to the poster of the message, the > > Reply > > > > > > > address is the edk2-devel mailing list. > > > > > > > > > > > > The behaviour looks somewhat broken, since as > > far as > > > > I > > > > > > can tell, > > > > > > replies now longer include the person you're > > > > replying > > > > > > to. > > > > > > (This doesn't happen when replying specifically > > to > > > > > > _you_, because you > > > > > > cc yourself on everything). > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you wish to send a private reply to only > > the > > > > > > > poster of the message, you may have to perform > > > > > > > some manual steps. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please let me know if you have any concerns > > about > > > > > > > these changes or if these configuration > > changes > > > > > > > cause any other side effects. > > > > > > > > > > > > Can we make sure the person being replied to is > > at > > > > least > > > > > > on cc? > > > > > > Otherwise, we've just broken the workflow for > > anyone > > > > > > filtering on > > > > > > whether they are on "to" or "cc". > > > > > > > > > > > > Why was this change necessary? > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > Leif