On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 1:20 PM Murray S. Kucherawy <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 3:53 PM Alessandro Vesely <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> > and maybe it can solve the "PSL problem" if we can constrain the problem >> > space to just the DMARC issues instead of recreating the >> > DBOUND-solve-for-all morass. >> >> This problem is simpler than DBOUND. Looking up text policies is common >> to a >> handful of protocols. A careful wording might make some statements >> reusable in >> general, even if the focus is kept on DMARC. >> > > Sure, the DMARC case is half of what DBOUND tried to tackle. If DBOUND > had focused just on the DMARC use case, it would've succeeded. > > If possible, we should be careful to create a solution that's extensible > to other use cases, not exclusive of them. Reviewing what DBOUND tried to > do might be very instructive here. > > -MSK > _______________________________________________ > dmarc mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc >
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
