Anything I can do about this?

I’m sending email to a mailman based mailing list and I’ve got a forensic report back due to a failed alignment. Any thoughts on how this could be avoided? I don’t know if this message has actually been quarantined at PNG Telikom but it would certainly be unhelpful if it has been.

> A message claiming to be from you has failed the published DMARC
> policy for your domain.
> 
>   Sender Domain: mrp.net
>   Sender IP Address: 2001:dd8:9:801::25
>   Received Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2019 13:43:27 +0100
>   SPF Alignment: no
>   DKIM Alignment: no
>   DMARC Results: Quarantine
> 
> ------ This is a copy of the headers that were received before the error
>        was detected.
> 
> X-DKIM-Failure: signature_incorrect
> Received: from nx-mailgw.apnic.net ([2001:dd8:9:801::25])
> 	by mx90.antispamcloud.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256)
> 	(Exim 4.89)
> 	(envelope-from <pngnog-bounces@apnic.net>)
> 	id 1ieINr-0007wk-1P
> 	for Rhyan.Tokaep@telikompng.com.pg; Mon, 09 Dec 2019 13:43:27 +0100
> DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
> 	d=apnic.net; s=halon191111;
> 	h=sender:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:list-subscribe:list-help:
> 	 list-post:list-archive:list-unsubscribe:list-id:subject:mime-version:date:
> 	 message-id:from:to:from;
> 	bh=BFHpjxgUCsVM8j9/BiBxMJvJ7o7A9d2DpSEvOHkyw38=;
> 	b=tVb1L533iyQCvqtNdAxJ7KRiIkuGR5wtWiwzFM6Z4fe/eGxaMEW7iRy2ItrNo8WNjnOF34UdiKkdC
> 	 SKHVT95KMrbkR/8szQ40cBVAJ68oewF9BmGbHpCkRuGYZri8pFX8H0mGP8Wzu1i2yAnSjTH9okBn6i
> 	 WxLukdPyHPnZt2OA=
> Received: from clove.apnic.net (clove.apnic.net [2001:dd8:9:801::23])
> 	by nx-mailgw.apnic.net (Halon) with ESMTP
> 	id 78b2d1e1-1a81-11ea-8b2f-005056b685e3;
> 	Mon, 09 Dec 2019 22:43:18 +1000 (AEST)
> Received: from clove.apnic.net (localhost [IPv6:::1])
> 	by clove.apnic.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 633A22E1D;
> 	Mon,  9 Dec 2019 22:43:21 +1000 (AEST)
> X-Original-To: pngnog@apnic.net
> Delivered-To: pngnog@clove.apnic.net
> Received: from smtp.apnic.net (ia-mailgw.apnic.net [203.119.110.25])
> 	by clove.apnic.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 1EB4A2E1B
> 	for <pngnog@apnic.net>; Mon,  9 Dec 2019 22:43:21 +1000 (AEST)
> Received: from guia.mrp.net (guia.mrp.net [138.201.66.172])
> 	by ia-mailgw.apnic.net (Halon) with ESMTPS
> 	id cbd7be71-1a80-11ea-99cb-005056b6f213;
> 	Mon, 09 Dec 2019 22:38:31 +1000 (AEST)
> Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
> 	by guia.mrp.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 898724640F36
> 	for <pngnog@apnic.net>; Mon,  9 Dec 2019 23:13:14 +1030 (ACDT)
> Received: from guia.mrp.net ([127.0.0.1])
> 	by localhost (guia.mrp.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
> 	with ESMTP id CKwYcgAcP-t5 for <pngnog@apnic.net>;
> 	Mon,  9 Dec 2019 23:13:13 +1030 (ACDT)
> Received: from nordschleife.local (61-245-144-62.3df590.adl.nbn.aussiebb.net
> 	[61.245.144.62]) (Authenticated sender: mrp)
> 	by guia.mrp.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B786946402C5
> 	for <pngnog@apnic.net>; Mon,  9 Dec 2019 23:13:12 +1030 (ACDT)
> DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=mrp.net; s=20191011;
> 	t=1575895393; bh=38tP5TP0n5L6xcO/LgJuNI41aP0vKT3lDnjE+1pr58c=;
> 	h=To:From:Subject:Date:From;
> 	b=AgBuhMwBbQrfEVyfHuR3TjCIIurxqqWyUH9+0X9f20nMOk/VwihQtwKvBCOEf1UYl
> 	EV9o+GBM8lyM1SMdQ7hTr3ZhMtt4Q6zQo/+FCYk2PIy42uoPAmAnJ1idYwgOANjR9S
> 	mh93ArbW6oBEMKtb5tqfnn/PFKcqNJUvqiYaAJMLR6IOgzMsyAlcfOSiAQdlxWIASn
> 	+IOS/mH//P9cOehifd2YxGg4l4nqhDNKZsJl5p769xkUawpY1PLFYIhEFWNEQ54ggb
> 	YuVZo6JWzSB0pRMmRJ9wat4rJdDYNSqIQyfFZCblOAElgGzG4w+0gDFE2KUOtp3jDM
> 	4O1HFvExdT+IQ==
> To: "pngnog@apnic.net" <pngnog@apnic.net>
> From: Mark Prior <mrp@mrp.net>
> Message-ID: <e799b05a-4e2c-6e71-73c4-66c4558f3638@mrp.net>
> Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2019 23:13:09 +1030
> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:68.0)
> 	Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.3.0
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Language: en-AU
> Subject: [PNGNOG] Coral Sea Cable
> X-BeenThere: pngnog@apnic.net
> X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
> Precedence: list
> List-Id: PNGNOG <pngnog.apnic.net>
> List-Unsubscribe: <https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/options/pngnog>,
> 	<mailto:pngnog-request@apnic.net?subject=unsubscribe>
> List-Archive: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/pngnog/>
> List-Post: <mailto:pngnog@apnic.net>
> List-Help: <mailto:pngnog-request@apnic.net?subject=help>
> List-Subscribe: <https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/pngnog>,
> 	<mailto:pngnog-request@apnic.net?subject=subscribe>
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
> Sender: pngnog-bounces@apnic.net
> Errors-To: pngnog-bounces@apnic.net
> Received-SPF: pass (mx90.antispamcloud.com: domain of apnic.net designates 2001:dd8:9:801::25 as permitted sender) client-ip=2001:dd8:9:801::25; envelope-from=pngnog-bounces@apnic.net; helo=nx-mailgw.apnic.net;
> X-SPF-Result: mx90.antispamcloud.com: domain of apnic.net designates 2001:dd8:9:801::25 as permitted sender
> X-DKIM-Status: pass /  / apnic.net / apnic.net /  / halon191111
> X-ADSP: all
> X-DKIM-Status: fail / signature_incorrect / mrp.net / mrp.net /  / 20191011

A bit difficult to tell, but just based on this:

SPF Alignment: no
DKIM Alignment: no

I would say it did get quarantined.

The best course of action would be to have the mailman based mailing list enable ARC on their systems (should be built-in to mailman, but I could be wrong as I don’t have much familiarity with mailman).

ARC isn’t built into the version of mailman that most people would use. Also complaining about something doesn’t imply doing something about it. I doubt my current configuration does anything, and I’m fairly happy with that given this problem.

Would it be okay if I try to put you in touch with someone that may be able to help? He may know of other options other than using ARC.

Sure, that would be great. Thanks.

I sent him a note with your contact info. Hopefully he’ll respond to one of us.

I got the following response:

The option in mailman is called “header munging” -> this just means messages use the list’s email address and the original poster’s email is in the reply-to. Simple workaround.