On Sun, Feb 1, 2026 at 1:47 PM Seth Blank <[email protected]> wrote:
> At this point, the charter is at its end. Personally, hearing from Richard > and Bron (and some private messages directly to me), I'm more comfortable > now moving ARC to obsolete/historic prior to a successor like DKIM2 being > published. > > Really the question now seems to be about choosing one of three paths: > 1. Take this document on now in a rechartered DMARC WG to conclude ARC. > 2. Shutter DMARC WG as intended, and take on this document via AD > sponsorship or some other more directed approach. > 3. Let this document be published with DKIM2 as part of a cluster of > documents concluding ARC are shifting to DKIM2 as explicit successor. > > So far, as Chair, I'm hearing several people ask for [1], and not much on > [2] or [3]. > > Seth > After reading Trent's original post and the various responses in this thread, I support option 3 (or some variation of it). My thinking is as follows. We are being told the ARC experiment is over and the only purpose in rechartering this group is to declare ARC obsolete. That DKIM2 will supersede and obsolete ARC. Note the future tense. Yet there is not yet publicly available running code for DKIM2.Several people have expressed that there is some value to ARC. The proper way to conclude the experiment would be for data and arguments, both pro and con, to be presented to a working group and for the working group to adopt or write the concluding document. I see no compelling reason for a rush to recharter this group to conclude the ARC experiment. Let the DKIM working group complete it's efforts on DKIM2 Once that work is completed, the DKIM working group can recharter and conclude the ARC experiment based on DKIM2 superseding ARC. This is the most appropriate path forward. Michael Hammer
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
