On Wed 22/Nov/2023 23:58:26 +0100 Seth Blank wrote:
Is there a point to this thread, that affects the text in the DMARCbis
document under charter criteria?
The point I made —death sentence to mailing lists— affects the text as an
exhortation to /not/ change Section 8.6.
For Doug's point, that DMARC is not so perfect as it may appear, I let Doug
speak for himself.
Best
Ale
Seth, as Chair
-mobile
On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 07:13 Douglas Foster <
dougfoster.emailstanda...@gmail.com> wrote:
RFC 7489 and DMARCbis are written as algorithms without exception
conditions. That silence leads product developers and mail administrators
to conclude that the algorithm can be implemented without allowing for
exceptions. Why would we expect a different result?
Withheld information can deceive.
On Wed, Nov 22, 2023, 5:14 AM Alessandro Vesely <ves...@tana.it> wrote:
On Wed 22/Nov/2023 00:51:24 +0100 Jim Fenton wrote:
I see that the DMARC marketing machine is hard at work. There was an
item on NPR (National Public Radio) “All Things Considered” this afternoon
heavily promoting DMARC:
https://www-cf.npr.org/2023/11/21/1214529474/how-to-keep-an-eye-out-for-cyber-scams-during-this-holiday-shopping-season
I have strong feelings about this article that are off-topic for this
mailing list.
What is not off-topic is the consideration that such sentiment implies
that a prohibitive statement would turn out to mean /MUST NOT use
mailing lists/. >>>
Best
Ale
--
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
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
