On Tuesday, December 3, 2019 4:21:47 PM EST John R Levine wrote: > On Tue, 3 Dec 2019, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 7:54 AM John Levine <[email protected]> wrote: > Nice to know I'm not the only one who lets my mail marinate for a while. > > > Assuming the ptype we're talking about is "dns" which is defined in the > > same document, the definition is terse and there's not much guidance for > > the designated expert about what things should be allowed with respect to > > future registrations. I think Scott basically said the same thing. I'd > > like to see those points addressed before green lighting it. > > Seems reasonable. Ale should be able to spin up a new one.
I'd prefer to see the new dns ptype separated from the dnswl discussion. I can see broad utility in the dns ptype (for example, if you want to indicate that a domain is testing DKIM, I think we need dns because that's where you find the information - it's not an attribute of the signature). Scott K _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
