On 5/16/2020 11:49 AM, Pete Resnick wrote:
On 15 May 2020, at 23:54, Hector Santos wrote:
On 5/15/2020 2:26 PM, Seth Blank wrote:
Should we consider adding JSON formatting to DMARC?
Protocols should be flexible. Adding it doesn't mean replace.
Flexible sometimes means less interoperable. You've already got to get
the XML right. Adding another format that you've got to get right
sounds like it increases the odds that an implementer is going to get
one of them wrong, and you've got to make sure that the XML and JSON
semantics match each other. As Dave said, unless there's a compelling
reason to add JSON, the potential for decreased interoperability says
to me this isn't a good idea.
On 5/16/2020 2:09 AM, Pete Resnick wrote:> On 15 May 2020, at 23:54,
Hector Santos wrote:
On 5/15/2020 2:26 PM, Seth Blank wrote:
Should we consider adding JSON formatting to DMARC?
Protocols should be flexible. Adding it doesn't mean replace.
Flexible sometimes means less interoperable. You've already got to get
the XML right. Adding another format that you've got to get right
sounds like it increases the odds that an implementer is going to get
one of them wrong, and you've got to make sure that the XML and JSON
semantics match each other. As Dave said, unless there's a compelling
reason to add JSON, the potential for decreased interoperability says
to me this isn't a good idea.
One can suggest XML is also complex to get right. The direction has
been with JSON for a number of years, especially with the JavaScript
developers using established tools and platforms based JSON. The APIs
are readily available.
Just consider, when the spec has XML-only, then for those who use a
solid JSON I/O system, they are now going to be required to add XML.
So for them, its additional development complexity. Everything they
probably do JSON related. The exception would be DMARC using XML.
This alone can delay or push aside DMARC Reporting implementation.
There are other formats:
- CSV
- Flat Name spaces, i.e. A.B.C.D
Even the Authentication-Result: header(s) can be sent, the one the
verifier would create.
Even an ad-hoc reporter that people can read immediately the email
without any additional format readers would work very well.
Anyway, when it comes to product development, and this all being put
together as a "product" by many key folks here, then "High Quality"
flexibility (options) generally works to cover a wider spectrum of
implementators.
We assume it will be done correctly.
--
HLS
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
