On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 6:43 AM, Tim Draegen <t...@eudaemon.net> wrote:
> DMARC implementations are already in the wild and deployed. Input to the > existing specification will be largely based on working implementations. > You might have your own reasons for waiting for this WG to review the DMARC > base draft, but if you want to provide input based on operational & > implementation experience, it's probably best to not wait. Indeed, -12 represents what's been deployed, and that was always the intent of this ISE submission. One could thus conclude that it is solid enough for everyone that has already deployed it, and that's not exactly a small or obscure list. Still, as has been said before: If there's more work to be done on this document, the working group is chartered to generate a Standards Track version using this document as a starting point once its other deliverables have been completed. We can record issues we'd like to see addressed in the tracker if there are some, and, if and when the WG gets there, we'll be off to the races. -MSK
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
