On Sun, Dec 6, 2020 at 8:58 AM Murray S. Kucherawy <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 6, 2020 at 5:09 AM Alessandro Vesely <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On chartering the WG in 2013, the decision was made to publish DMARC as >> independent submission, even though it was going to be discussed and >> reach >> consensus of a IETF WG. AIUI, that was the original question of this >> thread. >> > > This isn't correct. DMARC was not published as a product of this working > group. It was published through the Independent Submission stream, which > can only produce Informational documents. At the time, this was because > the group advancing DMARC wanted to preserve the installed base and not > cede change control to the IETF, so a working group was not an option. > Murray, your recollection isn't quite accurate. The group advancing DMARC was looking to preserve the installed base for a defined period of time due to a) almost all the implementations were custom code and b) there was a desire to see more experience in the wild as almost all of the deployments were by members of the group advancing DMARC. There was also a political element in that there were folks within IETF that felt the DMARC folks were only looking for a rubber stamp, nothing more. This resulted in part of the pushback. > > The working group and the ISE submission started their journies almost at > the same time, but they were procedurally independent. > There isn't a whole lot of procedure for ISE. Given the speed of the working group, in retrospect there wasn't much risk of changes impacting the installed base for a period much longer than what the DMARC group folks were looking for. Just saying. Michael Hammer
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
