On 1/26/2022 10:54 AM, John R Levine wrote:
Ahh, You are claiming I said something about a 'general method'. I
didn't.
Since you think otherwise, could you explain in simple language that
even I could understand how you reached that interpretation of my note?
Now we're both confused. When you said "The method of finding the
organizational domain should be specified outside of the base DMARC
specification" did that mean it's still unique to DMARC, but we put it
in a different document?
1. I said it should be specified outside of the base DMARC document.
That's different from saying what the internals of the separate document
should contain. I didn't comment on that.
2. But since you are asking, I think it is pretty easy to specify the
details of the mechanism in a way that does not require DMARC specific
text. Not because it is will or might have more general use -- that
that's often a collateral benefit -- but because specs should not
overspecify detail they don't need to.
If so, what's the point of making it separate? If not, what am I
missing?
It removes fate-sharing of the core mechanism from the messier component
mechanism that will have (at least) two very different operational
designs with the new one being... new and lacking solid field experience
that gives assurance for uptake. (Thought I said all that in the
original note. Should I have used caps?)
d/
--
Dave Crocker
[email protected]
408.329.0791
Volunteer, Silicon Valley Chapter
Information & Planning Coordinator
American Red Cross
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
