This all looks ok to me. I'll try and do a pull request tomorrow that includes the proposed changes.
It appears that Scott Kitterman <[email protected]> said: >On Wednesday, August 24, 2022 3:38:43 PM EDT Barry Leiba wrote: > >I reviewed your comments and I think they are generally reasonable, but I >think this one needs further discussion: > >> — Section 3.2.3 — >> >> The term "owns" >> here indicates that the entity or organization being referenced holds >> the registration of that DNS domain. >> >> Is holding the registration really the right angle? If someone is >> providing a service at example.org and gives out >> barryleiba.example.org for my use, I could be the domain owner for >> DMARC purposes, but I don’t “hold the registration”. I might even >> have complete control of the DMARC record for barryleiba.example.org. >> Maybe “has legitimate control of the use of that DNS domain, most >> often by holding its registration.” ? > >That's true, but only to the extent that example.org allows it based on their >internal policies, procedures, etc. They can change their mind for whatever >reason and while you may care deeply, it's opaque to the Internet as a whole. >DMARC deals with organizational domains (in your example, example.org), how >such organizations manage their internals isn't, I don't believe, germane. I >think registration is what we want here. > >Scott K > > _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
