On Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 1:13 PM Dotzero <dotz...@gmail.com> wrote: > My understanding when the DMARCbis effort was spun up was that we were > trying to move it to Standard Track. Is this still the goal? A number of > experimental things are currently being included. This would seem to > preclude DMARC being on Standard Track. > > If the experimental items being discussed were removed from the current > draft(s) and moved to separate documents, there would still be an issue if > there was a DMRC dependency rather than the experiment(s) being layered on > top of DMARC. > > I'm not giving any proposed answers. I'm simply asking the question. > Chairs? >
Not a chair, but I have played one on TV. The status we're going for is "Proposed Standard". Note the word "Proposed"; a document seeking this status doesn't need to be bulletproof out the door, as some evolution based on experience is required. The standard for publication is higher than Experimental or Informational, to be sure, but it's not so high that leaving room for development isn't permitted. If the things you're calling "experimental" here are based on consensus after the working group is clearly making informed decisions, I think we're good to go. We're not trying to leap directly to "Internet Standard". I would argue that Section 4.1 of RFC 2026 concurs with that position. -MSK, ART Area Director
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
