On 8/24/14 9:09 PM, Tim Draegen wrote:
So, the WG will maintain an official focus that will track the
milestones to allow for wider participation. That said, work on items
that are ahead of the official focus (or even behind if something is
overlooked and important) is most definitely
I agree with most of the commentary I've seen in this thread. I just
wanted to highlight one milestone:
- EOY 2014: Deliverable #1 (above document + possible methods to address).
- 92nd IETF: Deliverable #2 - Document describing DMARC improvements to
better support indirect mail
On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 9:09 PM, Tim Draegen t...@eudaemon.net wrote:
On Aug 24, 2014, at 10:35 PM, Kurt Andersen kb...@drkurt.com wrote:
Once the milestones discussion has settled..., Ned and myself will
create an outline of topics and work items that, when worked through,
should have
On Aug 24, 2014 5:48 PM, Tim Draegen t...@eudaemon.net wrote:
Once the milestones discussion has settled..., Ned and myself will
create an outline of topics and work items that, when worked through,
should have the WG arrive at its deliverables.
=- Tim
What about adopting a somewhat more
On Aug 24, 2014, at 10:35 PM, Kurt Andersen kb...@drkurt.com wrote:
Once the milestones discussion has settled..., Ned and myself will create
an outline of topics and work items that, when worked through, should have
the WG arrive at its deliverables.
=- Tim
What about adopting a
[dropping apps-discuss from this reply]
On 08/18/2014 08:31 AM, Tim Draegen wrote:
Hello world of email,
The DMARC WG is getting started [1]. This IETF working group's goal is to
address interoperability issues with indirect email flows, to document
operational practices, and to mature
Tim Draegen wrote:
On Aug 21, 2014, at 2:04 AM, Eliot Lear l...@cisco.com wrote:
- EOY 2014: Deliverable #1 (above document + possible methods to address).
I did notice the absence of anything related to process. How are we
going to get to a document (that) captures all known
On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 7:34 AM, Miles Fidelman mfidel...@meetinghouse.net
wrote:
I did notice the absence of anything related to process. How are we going
to get to a document (that) captures all known interoperability issue
between DMARC and indirect email flows? If this were an RFC,
On 8/23/2014 8:28 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 7:34 AM, Miles Fidelman
mfidel...@meetinghouse.net mailto:mfidel...@meetinghouse.net wrote:
I did notice the absence of anything related to process. How are we
going to get to a document (that) captures all
On Aug 21, 2014, at 2:04 AM, Eliot Lear l...@cisco.com wrote:
- EOY 2014: Deliverable #1 (above document + possible methods to address).
That seems quite short a period between adoption and approval, and I
question whether you will get sufficient review at a time when in
America there is
Hi Tim,
One suggestion...
On 8/18/14, 5:31 PM, Tim Draegen wrote:
- EOY 2014: Deliverable #1 (above document + possible methods to address).
That seems quite short a period between adoption and approval, and I
question whether you will get sufficient review at a time when in
America there
Hello world of email,
The DMARC WG is getting started [1]. This IETF working group's goal is to
address interoperability issues with indirect email flows, to document
operational practices, and to mature the existing DMARC base specification. If
you would like to join please visit the DMARC
12 matches
Mail list logo
