On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 10:44 AM Alessandro Vesely <[email protected]> wrote:
> +1, albeit I don't think DMARCbis arrives so quickly > I don't actually think there's much stopping us from beginning the work on DMARCbis now. Seth has dutifully been collecting those and putting them in the group's tracker for a while now, and everyone else is invited to make sure their favorite issues are thus recorded so we can go through them all when the time comes. With only a few weeks left in this chair, I won't pull that trigger now, but you should all expect to get going on that before long. > I think we've always been assuming that PSD DMARC would be input to > > DMARCbis, so we were planning to start the latter but not close it until > > the former was completed. This is the first time I've seen a different > > suggestion. > > > > I'd love to hear more opinions about ordering of the work here. This > seems > > like an ideal time to review and update our milestones. > > There are quite some issues about DMARC. Let me mention aggregate report > format first, as this brings out a third thing which can be done in > parallel, > namely to publish http://dmarc.org/dmarc-xml/0.2. > [...] > Please make sure that these are all recorded in the tracker so they can be discussed and factored in when the time comes. I'm sure there's a bunch of other issues, and we should start to collect > them. > This started some time ago. :-) -MSK
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
