SM wrote:
Hi Jim,
At 08:47 10-04-2014, Jim Fenton wrote:
More broadly: I'm not an expert on IETF publication criteria, but I
hope that, especially given this confusion, controls are in place to
protect against the publication of informational RFCs that might be
harmful in some respect.
It has been mentioned on this mailing list that publication of the
DMARC specification will be sought through a non-IETF stream. There is
a conflict review in such cases. BCP 92 describes the details.
It does strike me that DMARC, which is currently an internet-draft, not
even an RFC, is causing incredible disruption by its adoption, by a few
very large players. Methinks this indicates a serious problem, and
raises some questions about what measures might be taken when a big
player breaks the Internet by not playing nice. It sure seems that IETF
should play a role in this.
Miles Fidelman
--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is. .... Yogi Berra
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
