All This call for adoption ended a few weeks ago, I have been recalcitrant in following up. The chairs feel there is enough consensus to adopt this work in DMARC. While there were issues raised, the chairs feel they can be addressed through the document process.
thanks tim On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 2:00 AM Hector Santos <hsantos= 40isdg....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > On 8/21/2020 3:09 PM, Jim Fenton wrote: > > > On 8/15/20 3:53 PM, John Levine wrote: > >> Assurances that are provided by ADSP are generally obtained out of band > in the > >> real Internet, and not through ADSP. Current deployment of ADSP is not > >> recommended. > > > Is that not exactly the same situation with DMARC, except that the > > policy in question now is "reject" rather than "discardable"? Yes, > > it's just a keyword, but it reflects the semantics of the expected > > action as well. > > > > -Jim > > No one was expected to follow a reject, so it was said, until it did > happen. SPF pushed > > -- > Hector Santos, > https://secure.santronics.com > https://twitter.com/hectorsantos > > > _______________________________________________ > dmarc mailing list > dmarc@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc >
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
