On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 8:35 PM Neil Anuskiewicz <neil= 40marmot-tech....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> The reference to DBOUND was sparked by looking around at what w3aawg was > saying as I generally think they have some good papers and a great video > series on email authentication. But what I found on DBOUND isn’t > endorsement. They framed DBOUND in a positive light and encouraged people > to look into the project but that doesn’t mean the organization endorses > it. > DBOUND was an attempt to create, in the DNS, a mechanism that could do what the PSL does. There were essentially two proposals: Making assertions from the top down, and making assertions from the bottom up. You could liken these to the cookies case and the DMARC case. Sadly, there was no convergence and thus no consensus, so the WG disbanded (over six years ago) without producing anything. I'm not sure why a M3AAWG statement dated April of this year would make reference to it as if it were current. There was an attempt to restart the working group within the last year or so, but that push was not sufficiently organized to sustain a rechartering effort. The working group remains closed, though the mailing list remains open. -MSK, ART AD
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
