On July 20, 2022 2:49:47 AM UTC, John Levine <jo...@taugh.com> wrote:
>It appears that Scott Kitterman <skl...@kitterman.com> said:
>>The PSD definition is probably overlong already:
>>
>>> 3.2.8. Public Suffix Domain (PSD)
>>>
>>> The global Internet Domain Name System (DNS) is documented in
>>> numerous RFCs. It defines a tree of names starting with root, ".",
>>> immediately below which are Top-Level Domain names such as ".com" and
>>> ".us". The domain name structure consists of a tree of names, each
>>> of which is made of a sequence of words ("labels") separated by
>>> period characters. The root of the tree is simply called ".". The
>>> Internet community at large, through processes and policies external
>>> to this work, selects points in this tree at which to register domain
>>> names "owned" by independent organizations. Real-world examples of
>>> these points are ".com", ".org", ".us", and ".gov.uk". Names at
>>> which such registrations occur are called "Public Suffix Domains
>>> (PSDs)", and a registration consists of a label selected by the
>>> registrant to which a desirable PSD is appended. For example,
>>> "ietf.org" is a registered domain name, and ".org" is its PSD.
>
>I would chop a lot of that out. If people don't already know how DNS names
>work, they're not going to be able to use DMARC.
I agree.
>>My thought is to add text based on the above mail to the paragraph:
>>
>>PSDs are important to DMARC because subdomains of a PSD are different
>>organizations and subdomains of non-PSDs are part of the same organization.
>
>That seems OK.
Great. How about adding that and I'll take another look at the overall
definition later in the week.
Scott K
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
dmarc@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
