--On Monday, December 2, 2019 09:20 -0800 "Kurt Andersen (b)"
<[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 2, 2019 at 9:11 AM John C Klensin
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>> --On Monday, December 2, 2019 08:29 -0800 Dave Crocker
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> > On 12/2/2019 7:56 AM, Kurt Andersen (b) wrote:
>> >> There's also already RFC7960 which expands upon 5598 with
>> >> specific reference to DMARC's impact.
>> >
>> > ahh. thanks.
>> >
>> > It will help to have folk comment on the IETF mailing list,
>> > so that Klensin's comments don't just get responses from me.
>>
>> Unfortunately, 7960 does not explicitly update 5598, so that
>> relationship is difficult for anyone not heavily involved to
>> discover (that neither Dave nor I was aware of the
>> relationship is probably symptomatic). This may eventually
>> call for an update that replaces both documents or may
>> further justify a more or less comprehensive Applicability
>> Statement for the core email protocols.
>
>
> In this regard I think that something like Hector's
> "practitioner's guide" (probably as a BCP rather than a
> protocol standard) would be immensely helpful and meet this
> need. Maybe we need to look for making a trilogy of docs
> rather than just a duet: *21, *22, *23 :-)
Already proposed on the IETF list and in private interactions
with the ADs. It is probably a good sign that several of us
seem to be reaching similar conclusions.
john
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
