I could accommodate myself to PSD=Y, if we wer to document that "PSD" in this context means either "Public Suffix Domain" or "Private Suffix Domain"
I oppose use of the PSD=N tag to indicate an organizational domain. The use of PSD=N originated because some participants believed that explicit tagging of organizational domains was always unnecessary and possibly harmful. I cannot agree with either of those perceptions, and continue to consider the PSD=N tag to be inappropriate, confusing, and likely to cause implementation errors. Doug Foster On Sun, Jun 26, 2022 at 12:06 PM Barry Leiba <barryle...@computer.org> wrote: > As we've discussed on this mailing list, there is some evangelizing to > be done regarding the domains that should add psd=y to their DMARC > records. We should have the tag added to the relevant IANA registry > before we embark on that, and the current dmarcbis draft is ready for > supporting that registration. > > The registry policy is Specification Required; Scott Kitterman is the > designated expert for the > registry and is prepared to approve the registration if the working > group is ready to do it. Todd, as draft editor, could make the formal > registration request to IANA. > > So: Is the working group ready to register the psd= tag, based on the > description in the -10 version of the dmarcbis draft? The relevant > documentation includes the description in Section 4.8 and the formal > definition in Section 5.3. > > Please comment in this thread about whether you agree with making the > registration now, or whether you do not agree and why. > > Barry, as chair > > _______________________________________________ > dmarc mailing list > dmarc@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc >
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
