On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 12:16 PM, Vlatko Salaj <[email protected]> wrote:
> > That, sir, is false, both as to fact and as to causality. > > The choice was among different varieties of pain, but > > no amount of preparation would have made the pain avoidable. > > that's a completely wrong assumption. they all knew DMARC doesn't > work for any case where 3rd party is involved. document even says so. > I think you're talking about different "they"s here. I believe Stephen is talking about mailing list operators and software developers, while you're talking about large ISPs. > and thus, early ignorance brought us here where we have DMARC > on non-IETF path, where we r bitching about mailing lists and > where we have 3 different 3rd party proposals. > Sorry, but that's not at all correct. The reason DMARC is not (presently) in the IETF stream has nothing to do with any of the above points. -MSK
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
