On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Hector Santos <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 6/8/2014 1:00 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
>
>> Phillip Hallam-Baker writes:
>>
>>   > NNTP was designed 30 years ago. We should consider moving on.
>>   > The modern protocol world is JSON/REST
>>
>> That's off-topic for this list, IMO, and I don't intend to discuss it
>> unless the moderator(s) make clear that it is on-topic.
>>
>
>  What I believe is on-topic is that several people participating in
>> development of DMARC-related standards have expressed concern about
>> the impact on mailing lists.
>>
>
As this isn't a list associated with a working group, it doesn't have a
formal charter as such other than the idea that we probably should stick to
the one-paragraph description we gave to the IESG to create the list, which
says:

"Discussion related to the development, clarification, and implementation
of the DMARC protocol, and operational uses of it."

Since mailing lists are obviously a major consideration for DMARC, paying
them due attention is certainly valid here as long as it's in the context
of DMARC.  The more abstract conversation about "mailing lists redux"
should probably get its own list, or maybe take place on ietf-822, at least
until there's actual work before the IETF such as a draft.

However, again on the informal point, I don't think there's a need to make
a declaration about something being off-topic until it's clearly become a
distraction from the above.

If there is a charter for a new DMARC WG work, you can bet I will request
> that any form of 5322.From-Corruption concept be considered OFF TOPIC and
> OUT OF SCOPE in the new WG charter except to be aware of intentional
> From-Corruption is to be considered a new security exploit and threat to be
> mitigated. And for the record, I will also appeal any IETF work that begins
> to suggest From-Corruption concepts as a means to bypass security
> protocols. I will appeal it.
>

Setting aside for the moment how premature this threat is given that
there's not even a skeleton charter under proposal right now, I suggest you
read Section 6.5 of RFC2026 to figure out what the official basis would be
for such an appeal.

-MSK
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc

Reply via email to