Re: not really to do with Re: WG Review: Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting & Conformance (dmarc)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 7/15/2014 8:55 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> I think, despite all your assertion by distant authorities, it may be that 
> something involving U/I requirements (not design, I agree that's out of scope) 
> may be part of the least bad solution we have to the problems the WG is going 
> to be chartered to solve.


1. What sort of 'proximity' do you require, before you can be swayed by
authoritative information?

2. By 'least bad', it appears that you mean it is ok to standardize
something that is known not to work, to the extent that the end user is
expected to be part of the decision process.

d/

-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net





[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]