On 3/21/25 9:06 AM, Todd Herr wrote:
Assuming that what was "called for adoption" was the "motivation"
draft, I think it's *way* premature to presume much if anything
about solution space, and especially anything about its
relationship with DMARC. The charter, otoh, is pretty clear that
if liaison is needed that that will be done.
Again, I'm not sure why anything needs to be considered now. We
should seriously not get ahead of ourselves.
Please stop using the word "presume" in reference to the context of
the question I have asked; I have made no presumptions here, as I
understand the meaning of the word.
I have stated my reasons for posing the question I posed. You have
made it clear that you do not accept my reasons. Let's let the list
decide whether or not the conversation should continue at this point.
Uh, there is no reason to go full aggro here. Wondering why we need to
figure this out now is hardly a matter of "accepting" anything. It's
just a question of time and space given the lack of much if any clarity.
When there is an actual wg protocol draft, the relationship to DMARC
would be more clear. Right now? Not so much.
Mike
_______________________________________________
Ietf-dkim mailing list -- ietf-dkim@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ietf-dkim-le...@ietf.org
