On 1/20/2018 9:15 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 9:52 AM, Kurt Andersen <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: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] <mailto:[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. Kurt's correct. ARC (experimental) depends on A-R (standards track), not the other way around.
That is what I would think, but the key concern I would think, we don't want to add something ARC related to A-R if its not generic and only specific to ARC.
Personally, it may be premature. Wait until ARC is more than settle in its direction before modifying any standard track item. But if its a generic change, that fits more than just ARC, that sounds ok.
Keep in mind, there are might be others, besides my own package, who can't/won't (for various reasons) use OpenARC or OpenDMarc and/or OpenA-R. Hopefully, we will be able to write (implement) this from the RFC "functional specifications" from scratch.
Thanks -- HLS _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
