Re: [dmarc-ietf] Seeking volunteers to edit DMARCbis
On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 5:02 PM Jim Fenton wrote: > About a year ago, I had suggested [1] that the reporting and policy > mechanisms of DMARC be split, and was, I think, the only one supporting > that idea. There were quite a few comments along the line of, "it's not > broken, so why should we go to the trouble?" If I was not on the record before as believing such a split is a good idea, I am now. -MSK, just participating ___ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
Re: [dmarc-ietf] Seeking volunteers to edit DMARCbis
On 6/12/2020 8:02 PM, Jim Fenton wrote: On 6/12/20 10:49 AM, Alexey Melnikov wrote: About a year ago, I had suggested [1] that the reporting and policy mechanisms of DMARC be split, and was, I think, the only one supporting that idea. Jim, I supported the proposal as well. https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/s-UTti8Hlye6mYSMODDoYvfvKCs/ We even exchanged emails about it. Although you have only had a preliminary discussion, do you have in mind an editorial split (different functional pieces, but DMARC is still one thing) or an actual split into separate specifications? Someone (not sure who) said in yesterday's interim that DMARC could run into trouble in IETF Last Call or in IESG review because of the breakage to mailing lists, etc. If we had independent specifications, at least the reporting pieces could proceed. So I (still) support the split. [1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/HJwOvLspQKo-_GuW7W9xZPvv370/ +1, I also support the split. It worked with DKIM, separating your SSP Policy as a proposed standard allowing us to move forward with DKIM-base as a STD. Unfortunately, ADSP was never completed and dropped. I see the following: DMARC-Base proposed standard DMARC-Reporting proposed standard DMARC-TPA (Third Party Authorization) Experimental Get it done. -- Hector Santos, https://secure.santronics.com https://twitter.com/hectorsantos ___ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
Re: [dmarc-ietf] Seeking volunteers to edit DMARCbis
On 6/12/20 10:49 AM, Alexey Melnikov wrote: > Hi Alessandro, > > On Fri, Jun 12, 2020, at 5:51 PM, Alessandro Vesely wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Fri 12/Jun/2020 18:09:41 +0200 Alexey Melnikov wrote: >>> On behalf of DMARC chairs I would like to ask for volunteers to edit future >>> revisions of draft-kucherawy-dmarc-dmarcbis. We are likely to split up the >>> current document into multiple drafts that can be progressed in parallel, >>> so we are seeking multiple editors to help with this. >> >> Is it already defined which and how many I-Ds will the WG do? > We (chairs) only had a preliminary discussion. I think at least 3 (aggregated > reports, failure reports, the rest). About a year ago, I had suggested [1] that the reporting and policy mechanisms of DMARC be split, and was, I think, the only one supporting that idea. There were quite a few comments along the line of, "it's not broken, so why should we go to the trouble?" Although you have only had a preliminary discussion, do you have in mind an editorial split (different functional pieces, but DMARC is still one thing) or an actual split into separate specifications? Someone (not sure who) said in yesterday's interim that DMARC could run into trouble in IETF Last Call or in IESG review because of the breakage to mailing lists, etc. If we had independent specifications, at least the reporting pieces could proceed. So I (still) support the split. -Jim [1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/HJwOvLspQKo-_GuW7W9xZPvv370/ ___ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
Re: [dmarc-ietf] Seeking volunteers to edit DMARCbis
Hi Alessandro, On Fri, Jun 12, 2020, at 5:51 PM, Alessandro Vesely wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri 12/Jun/2020 18:09:41 +0200 Alexey Melnikov wrote: > > > > On behalf of DMARC chairs I would like to ask for volunteers to edit future > > revisions of draft-kucherawy-dmarc-dmarcbis. We are likely to split up the > > current document into multiple drafts that can be progressed in parallel, > > so we are seeking multiple editors to help with this. > > > Is it already defined which and how many I-Ds will the WG do? We (chairs) only had a preliminary discussion. I think at least 3 (aggregated reports, failure reports, the rest). > > > If you are interested or know somebody who might be interested, please > > email dmarc-cha...@ietf.org directly. Also feel free to email > > dmarc-cha...@ietf.org if you have questions about expectations, time > > commitment, process, etc. > > > I'd be interested, if there are no better editors... > > I know Tim is maintaining a draft on GitHub[*]. Is that the doc to be split? Yes. > > Best > Ale > -- > > [*] https://github.com/moonshiner/draft-kucherawy-dmarc-dmarcbis Best Regards, Alexey ___ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
Re: [dmarc-ietf] Seeking volunteers to edit DMARCbis
Hi, On Fri 12/Jun/2020 18:09:41 +0200 Alexey Melnikov wrote: On behalf of DMARC chairs I would like to ask for volunteers to edit future revisions of draft-kucherawy-dmarc-dmarcbis. We are likely to split up the current document into multiple drafts that can be progressed in parallel, so we are seeking multiple editors to help with this. Is it already defined which and how many I-Ds will the WG do? If you are interested or know somebody who might be interested, please email dmarc-cha...@ietf.org directly. Also feel free to email dmarc-cha...@ietf.org if you have questions about expectations, time commitment, process, etc. I'd be interested, if there are no better editors... I know Tim is maintaining a draft on GitHub[*]. Is that the doc to be split? Best Ale -- [*] https://github.com/moonshiner/draft-kucherawy-dmarc-dmarcbis ___ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
[dmarc-ietf] Seeking volunteers to edit DMARCbis
Hi all, On behalf of DMARC chairs I would like to ask for volunteers to edit future revisions of draft-kucherawy-dmarc-dmarcbis. We are likely to split up the current document into multiple drafts that can be progressed in parallel, so we are seeking multiple editors to help with this. If you are interested or know somebody who might be interested, please email dmarc-cha...@ietf.org directly. Also feel free to email dmarc-cha...@ietf.org if you have questions about expectations, time commitment, process, etc. Best Regards, Alexey, as DMARC co-chair ___ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc