On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 14:50 Kurt Andersen (b) <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'm uncomfortable with the terminology implied by the term > "arc.closest-fail". I think that it is more "ams.closest-fail" or > "arc.ams-broken". AMS is expected to not verify except in the most recent > ARC set. Doing so is not in any way a "failure" and has no bearing on the > validity of the ARC chain (as documented in the cv parameter). Opinions > regarding a replacement term? > My strong preference is this be tracked and the considerstions therein referenced in Experimental Considerations. I have no strong preference what we actually call it. I’m fine with ams.cb for “closest break” if that keeps things nice and tidy for an A-R (i.e. arc=pass ams.cb=1). I also like it because then we have arc cv and ams cb. But I’m splitting hairs, and again, don’t really care what it’s called. >
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
