On Tue, 2 Jan 2018, Kurt Andersen (b) wrote:
I don't think this will be super complicated, but I do think it would be a
mistake to try and publish now and then retrofit rather than adding it
before we publish.
I agree (which is why I started off with the first draft that is currently
found in
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol-10#section-10).
The mechanics of one doc, two docs, three docs more (can you tell that I've
been cleaning out Dr. Seuss from my bookshelves over the break?) is less
important to me than having a workable strategy. Migrations are always the
hardest part of an implementation.
Oh, good. For reasons outlined in previous messages, I'm pretty sure that
without some changes to the current spec, the only way to do a migration
will be to invent new headers (ARC-2-Seal: ARC-2-Message-Signature: ...)
which would look awfully silly.
R's,
John
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
