In article <CAL0qLwbo1AtJ6LG1UuSSoBC-GwjdQsc5CA2h6q5VqMxH=dx...@mail.gmail.com> you write: >Just to be clear: The policy for changes to that registry is "Expert >Review", but since the action that put it there was a document with IETF >consensus, I'm pretty hesitant about just approving this change based on a >formal request. I'd rather at least see some consensus discussion about >it, or even better, a revision/update to RFC8601.
Hey, wait, Expert Review is supposed to be considerably looser than RFC Required. Since there's no danger of running out of token names, I'd encourage you to accept new ptypes if they have a clear spec and a plausible use case. In this instance, I think the description in the I-D is OK, but for the use case I would like some evidence that someone, somewhere is implementing it and doing something with the result. R's, John _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
