That is our plan. The change to 7601 is to segment the ABNF for clearer extension by ARC. Wait and see what Murray puts in and then we can discuss.
On Jan 20, 2018 09:18, "Hector Santos" <[email protected]> wrote: > IMEV, 7601 should be extendable without continuing modifying 7601 by > augmented technology, i.e. ARC itself should do the 7601 "add-on" > considerations and that shouldn't effect 7061 or any 7601 implementations. > > On 1/20/2018 12:11 PM, Hector Santos wrote: > >> On 1/19/2018 11:19 PM, Kurt Andersen wrote: >> >>> >>> On Jan 19, 2018 19:53, Hector Santos <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> If this is done, then shouldn't the ARC proposal be standard track >>> rather than experimental? >>> >>> >>> Making 7601 more extensible does not affect the state of ARC. >>> >>> >> It was my understanding that the IETF frowns upon making proposed >> standards RFC connections to experimental, non-standard stuff. >> >> If ARC fails as an experiment, 7601 will be left with legacy >> dependencies and wasted development *overhead* on an abandoned >> experimentation that has yet to proven its value. >> >> Thanks >> >> > -- > HLS > > > _______________________________________________ > dmarc mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc >
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
