In what way is this a new issue that has not already been argued to death in the WG? I think for WGLC, we've already done this. We will, no doubt get to have this conversation during the IETF last call, but for the working group, this strikes me as exactly the type of relitigation of issues we've been counseled to avoid.
Scott K On February 29, 2024 6:54:57 PM UTC, Todd Herr <todd.herr=40valimail....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: >Colleagues, > >I've been reading DMARCbic rev -30 today with a plan to collect the first >set of minor edits and I came across a sentence that I believe goes beyond >minor, so wanted to get a sanity check. > >Section 7.6, Domain Owner Actions, ends with the following sentence: > >In particular, this document makes explicit that domains for >general-purpose email MUST NOT deploy a DMARC policy of p=reject. > > >I don't believe this to be true, however. Rather, Section 8.6, >Interoperability Considerations, says SHOULD NOT on the topic (e.g., "It is >therefore critical that domains that host users who might post messages to >mailing lists SHOULD NOT publish p=reject") > >Section 7.6 therefore should be updated to read "domains for >general-purpose email SHOULD NOT deploy a DMARC policy of p=reject", yes? > _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
