On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 3:53 PM Alessandro Vesely <ves...@tana.it> wrote:
> > > and maybe it can solve the "PSL problem" if we can constrain the problem > > space to just the DMARC issues instead of recreating the > > DBOUND-solve-for-all morass. > > This problem is simpler than DBOUND. Looking up text policies is common > to a > handful of protocols. A careful wording might make some statements > reusable in > general, even if the focus is kept on DMARC. > Sure, the DMARC case is half of what DBOUND tried to tackle. If DBOUND had focused just on the DMARC use case, it would've succeeded. If possible, we should be careful to create a solution that's extensible to other use cases, not exclusive of them. Reviewing what DBOUND tried to do might be very instructive here. -MSK
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
