According to Dave Crocker <[email protected]>: >On 2/9/2026 4:07 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: >> But it seems from Trent's comments that the industry would actually >> benefit from an assertion, in the form of an RFC, that there's nothing >> left of value down that road. > >So, he thinks that giving the [ARC] spec the official status of historic >does not suffice? That's surprising.
Not in the world that believes every RFC is a standard. "See, it says at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc8164/ that RFC 8164 is historic." "Don't be silly, I'm looking at it https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8164.txt and it says it isn't." It would be nice if the world understood our processes but we have tons of experience that tells us it doesn't. A document we can point at that says it's dead would be a lot more persuasive. R's, John -- Regards, John Levine, [email protected], Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
