On 12/6/20 4:42 AM, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
On Sun 06/Dec/2020 04:33:13 +0100 Jim Fenton wrote:
On 4 Dec 2020, at 15:00, Kurt Andersen (b) wrote:
The entire point of this working group (and the bis version that is
in progress) is to move DMARC into the fully-recognized "standards"
track. Note that even the current email specs are not "standards" in
IETF parlance (there's another WG addressing that). It's mostly
organizational semantic slicing-and-dicing.
The current email specs (specifically RFC 5321 and 5322) are Draft
Standard, which is part of Standards Track. There is an enormous
difference between Informational and Standards Track in terms of the
amount of vetting and consensus required for approval. From RFC 2026:
An "Informational" specification is published for the general
information
of the Internet community, and does not represent an Internet
community
consensus or recommendation.
However, discussion and consensus which led to RFC 7489 were not much
different from the process that is taking place now. This mailing
list started in April 2013.
Previous discussion took place elsewhere. There is still a 2011 draft
at:
https://dmarc.org/draft-dmarc-base-00-01.txt
And SSP was started in 2004. What's your point?
Mike, i swear it's deja vu all over again
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
