On 7 Nov 2020, at 20:12, Steven M Jones wrote:
Okay, but what is the expected payoff from splitting it out? Does it
make it easier to process and approve updates of the policy content
separately from, say, the description of record discovery or Alignment
concepts? Easier to pass muster for Standards Track? Are implementers
currently confused and dissuaded by having policy details mixed with
the other content?
If the benefits seem worthwhile, I could get behind the split - but
there ought to be a clear benefit.
The benefit I have in mind is that reporting does not cause issues with
indirect mail flows (the addressing of which is item 1 on the WG
charter), so it can proceed even while there isn’t WG consensus on how
to solve that problem for the policy piece. Or in the extreme case, it
can proceed even if IESG considers the policy piece to not have an
acceptable solution.
Of course, if the solution to the policy piece is likely to affect the
discovery/binding of the policy and reporting, which would be in the
base document, this argument doesn’t hold.
-Jim
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
dmarc@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
