>> 18:15  25 min  Next steps, including:
>>   - draft-akagiri-dmarc-virtual-verification
>
> That's quite a long time to discuss something that isn't really dmarc.

Not all 25 minutes are for that; that is included in the time slot,
along with anything else we put into "next steps".

(And I'm expecting that we'll wind up with more than 25 minutes, in the end.)

> My impression is that after ARC, the industry interest is in finding a path
> that standardizes DMARC.  This proposal does not serve that goal.

We can certainly discuss whether we should consider the
virtual-verification proposal at all; please do that on that thread.
Very much, please do.

I do expect that we'll discuss "path toward a Proposed Standard
version of DMARC," and I'll put that into the "next steps" section on
the next update to the agenda.

Barry

_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc

Reply via email to