Re: [dmarc-ietf] using selectors to identify sources

On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 2:08 PM, Seth Blank wrote: > On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 11:29 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy > wrote: > >> On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 11:12 PM, Seth Blank wrote: >> >>> Or maybe, put a different way, the question is: what's

Re: [dmarc-ietf] using selectors to identify sources

On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 11:29 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: > On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 11:12 PM, Seth Blank wrote: > >> Or maybe, put a different way, the question is: what's the simplest way, >> with the least delta to the spec, that allows for

Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC RFC status to target

On 7/8/2017 11:24 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: There's interest verging on anxiety to get this deployed, and thus there are both private and public implementations of it that are relatively stable (modulo some open questions about the draft content). It won't be long before we're able to

Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC RFC status to target

On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 10:55 AM, Dave Crocker wrote: > 2. The mechanics of cascading signatures that ARC does /is/ unusual > and possibly unique. I believe the only operationally established exemplar > in this space is the X.509 cert signature hierarchy. However it is an

Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC RFC status to target

On 7/7/2017 11:05 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Dave Crocker > wrote: Having intermediaries signing thing and having receivers base delivery and labeling decisions on those signatures is new and, I

Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC RFC status to target

On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Dave Crocker wrote: > I've come to believe that it makes more sense, at this stage, to seek a > status of Experimental. That's not meant as a criticism of the work, but > rather to accurately reflect the current understanding of ARC dynamics.