On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 5:55 PM Brandon Long <blong= 40google....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> Shouldn't be separate as defined: > The Sender header proposal is also an adjunct directly to DMARC itself, > changing the existing dmarc policy evaluation in a direct way. I don't > think that should be done by a separate spec, if we do decide to, it should > be part of the DMARC spec itself, especially so we can explore all the ways > that it changes the existing spec. I agree with others who have said that > adding this makes DMARC not DMARC, though I'm willing to explore that in > more depth. I understand Dave's points regarding user level signals, but I > think alignment benefits in other ways. > The intended status of the document is Experimental. My assumption from that is that we (the community at large) should go try this and see if it's effective. If it is, it's up for consideration to be folded into the DMARCbis work. This is the method proposed for the PSD document as well, and it has the same status. -MSK
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
