Scott Kitterman writes: > IETF RFCs are interoperability specifications, not conformance > standards. DMARCbis can specify how to use DKIM/SPF results in a > correct/interoperable way within DMARC. That's as far as it goes. > Mandating how to set up either is out of scope.
Lots of IETF RFCs do include MUST/SHOULD/MAY etc and usual mening of that you implement RFC xxx is that you do implement all MUSTs, and that is usually then interpreted as you being conforming to that RFC. There is 48 RFCs that do include section called "Conformance Requirements". Those usually include more complex protocols where it is hard to find out what is mandatory to implement and what is not. Those include IPsec RFCs, SMTP service Extension for DSN, Certificate management messages over CMS, internet printing protocol, XMPP, etc. Implementors who are implementing the document find it easier if things they MUST implement are easy to find and collecting list of mandatory to implement things in one location is good thing. Especially as it seems the current specification is very unclear about the mandatory to implement features, as I seem to have misread them completely... So we definitely need section listing what are the mandatory to implement features for implementations that are supposedly following this standard. -- [email protected] _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
