On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 2:14 PM Alessandro Vesely <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Mon 18/Jan/2021 19:56:21 +0100 John Levine wrote: > > > > >> BTW, the current spec does not mean that an invalid p= implies the > >> DMARC record is broken. If it did, it wouldn't say to check rua= in > >> that case. > > > > I know. It would have been better if it didn't say that, but it's too > > late to change it now. > > > I don't understand why you say it's too late. This is not emailcore, > and we don't risk getting back to proposed standard if we change too much. > > We're just writing a proposed standard. When choosing between a > better spec and sticking to the existing one what criteria are we > complying with? > You are assuming facts not in evidence, namely that your proposal results in a better standard. Michael Hammer
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
