Re: [dmarc-ietf] Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-dmarc-psd

[Alessandro Vesely <[e-mail]>]

On Fri 12/Jul/2019 19:30:35 +0200 Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Thursday, July 11, 2019 6:07:50 AM EDT Alessandro Vesely wrote:
>>> 2. If explicit call outs to ICANN/limited operator capacity to
>>> implement are needed
>>
>> Appendix B.1 lacks a criterion to establish enlisting.  Couldn't we
>> require an explicit statement about seizing DMARC reports in, say, the
>> delegation report?  Alternatively, that policy can be stated in a
>> well-known place under the delegation services URL, so that
>> registrants know what they do.
> 
> It's in the appendix because we don't have a clear path forward.  This is part 
> of the experiment.  We need to be careful though since different PSDs operate 
> under different authorities and controls, so there is a point beyond which it's 
> not the IETF that decides.


I should have written more clearly the two issues.  One is the
criterion.  I hypothesized that all what is needed to gran enlistment
to a PSO is that its policy to seize DMARC at PSD level be published,
so that registrant can learn about is before registering.  Is that
correct?  I mean does a public statement suffice?


The second issue is how to publish. In case the answer to the 1st
question is yes, would https://PSO.tld/.well-known/dmarc-psd/policy do?


Best
Ale
--