On 5/11/2016 12:00 PM, Barry Leiba wrote:
I'm pulling the arc-discuss list back off the distribution for this
message (and it's probably a good idea to alert people when you add a
new mailing list to an ongoing discussion).
Kurt's original message asked whether the DMARC working group...
1. ...wants to work on the ARC spec, using
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-andersen-arc/ as a starting
point, and
2. ...also wants to work on ARC usage recommendations, using
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-jones-arc-usage/ as a starting
point.
It certainly seems that the working group is interested in discussing
ARC, as I can judge from the discussion in the short time since Kurt's
proposal. So let's go back and get a proper answer:
Does anyone object to having the DMARC working group take on this work?
Does anyone object to using the two documents above as starting points
for that work?
Does anyone have an alternative proposal?
Please respond to this list, <[email protected]>, by 20 May.
Barry, for the DMARC chairs
Barry, I believe the IETF should offer an simplified Policy Lookup
alternative for 3rd party authorization. It should be a "product
option" for implementators of any size.
I think the ARC framework attempts to achieve the same end result at a
very more complex, higher cost design approach. I don't opposed any
further development, however, technical alternatives should be offered.
I could reintroduce a modified DSAP (DKIM Signature Authorization
Protocol) proposal that would piggy back off the DMARC protocol.
I could consolidate ADSP/ATPS and wrap it over DMARC.
I think the IETF should offer simplified alternatives using the
original proof of concept "Policy DNS lookup" models. DMARC now
replaced ADSP - a policy lookup solution. It just needs to be further
developed with 3rd party extensions. That could include ARC as well.
Thanks
--
HLS
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
