Subject: [dmarc-ietf] Request to accept a new I-D into the WG work items

From: Kurt Andersen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2018 10:42:04 -0700

I'd like to recommend that we (DMARC-WG) accept
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kitterman-dmarc-psd-00 into our work
queue. It aligns with our charter already.

--Kurt Andersen

---

From: Hector Santos <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2018 14:38:58 -0400

> queue. It aligns with our charter already.

+1

I would also suggest to use the document proposal (and subsequent WG 
discussions) to help codify sub-domain alignment ambiguities in DMARC 
(rfc7489, section 3.1, 3.1.1 and 3.1.2) between the identities:

     Author Domain,
     Signer Domain, and
     Return Path Domain

and how this proposal applies.

-- 
HLS

---

From: Seth Blank <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2018 12:40:45 -0700

I concur. This is an important work item for the group, and fits cleanly
into Phase 3 of our charter.

On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 10:42 AM Kurt Andersen <[email-masked]> wrote:

> _______________________________________________
> dmarc mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
>

---

From: "John Levine" <[email-masked]>
Date: 27 Oct 2018 16:04:05 -0400

>queue. It aligns with our charter already.

OK with me.  I'd like a clearer explanation of what problem it solves,
but that should be fixable.