Re: Mailing lists - assumptions

On 04/19/2014 04:40 AM, Ned Freed wrote:
>> On 4/18/2014 12:20 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>> > We need to answer the question, explicitly, about whether or not the
>> > sites which are currently honoring the DMARC p=reject policy can be
>> > assumed to adopt whatever we come up with.  Because if the answer is
>> > no, then your assumption/requirement #2 is flat-out impossible:
>
>
>> Clearly the broadening of DMARC's application is motivating the current
>> discussion.
>
>> However I believe the technical issues that Pete and others are pursuing
>> does not depend upon DMARC and can have benefits beyond it.
>
>> As such, I suggest the focus be on basic issues and benefits, rather
>> than putting DMARC into the critical path.
>
> Quite right. There may be value in having a way of attaching these 
> sorts of, I
> guess I'll call them recipient semantics, to originator signatures 
> independent
> of their ability to address the current DMARC mess.

I'd suggest to extend this list of assumptions/work-to-do to other 
scenario's like Johns 'WSJ mail an article' example and other use cases 
which are common on the Internet.

/rolf

_______________________________________________
ietf-822 mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-822