Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-dmarc-rfc7601bis-04: Discuss
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dmarc-rfc7601bis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- DISCUSS: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- This is mainly a process discuss. I share Alvaro's concern about this being marked as "updating" RFC7601, when it seem like a full replacement. I'm promoting it to a DISCUSS because I think this needs to be resolved before publication. The current structure will make it very difficult for readers to figure out which parts of each doc they need to worry about. I think it needs to either go back to "obsoleting" 7601, or it needs to be recast to just talk about the changes. Note that if the former path is chosen, the IANA considerations in 7601 will need to be copied forward. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I mostly just reviewed the diff. Thank you for mostly avoiding unnecessary changes. That makes the diff tools much more useful than they are for bis drafts that make wholesale organization and stylistic changes. _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
