I definitely prefer it go in the standards track document. There's nothing experimental about it.
Scott K On March 21, 2018 3:20:21 PM UTC, "Murray S. Kucherawy" <[email protected]> wrote: >On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 2:20 PM, Kurt Andersen (b) <[email protected]> >wrote: > >> In the diff I sent in, I also proposed header.s (selector). I think >that's >> >>> important for troubleshooting. Is there a reason you left it out? >I can >>>> do >>>> another draft for it, if you want, but it seems like a lot of >process >>>> overhead >>>> for not very much more. >>>> >>> >>> It's in the base ARC draft. Does it matter which document does it? >>> >> >> We had talked about putting the definitions into 7601bis because that >doc >> is standards track (so presumably more enduring) than the >"experimental" >> ARC spec. >> > >Ah, OK. I don't mind which one has it, but I do want to avoid >duplicating >effort. So I'm fine with either. > >-MSK _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
