On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 1:58 AM Tim Wicinski <tjw.i...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Scott > > PSD DMARC does talk about organizational domains which from the original > DMARC spec (section 3.2) > does say 'Acquire a "public suffix" list' > > The addition of the preamble text shouldn't move the document in either > direction. > I do feel anything which helps focus us on moving forward on DMARC-bis is > a good thing. > The WG should be able to start writing the PSL document right away. > Tim, I think that you are being too liberal in applying transitive references. The PSD document only refers to the PSL in - Informative References - Appendix A.1 - Appendix B.3 - Appendix C.2 (implementations) I don't think that it is fair to say that anyone who refers to the org domain concept as cited in the DMARC spec is necessarily invoking the PSL. I do have a problem with the conflation of the org domain with a super-organizational "realm" (?) that may impose conditions upon organizations that fall within their jurisdictional purview. My main concerns are with the potential usurpation of the org domain's policy declaration rights. "Moving" the org domain up one level disenfranchises the organizations and that is the wrong thing to do IMO. As to the proposed "let's run this as an experiment pending DMARCbis", I don't see how that satisfies Dave's concern about creating new work for receivers in order to help a small set of domain (realm) owners. I'm not opposed to it, but I just don't see how this solves the issue. --Kurt
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
