[dmarc-ietf] Re: Proposed Recharter to Conclude the ARC Experiment

[Alessandro Vesely <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

In this case, I'd support (2).  It does the lesser damage.

Best
Ale

On Fri 06/Feb/2026 15:18:13 +0100 Seth Blank wrote:
> All-- please keep discussion on topic. We are discussing whether to
> recharter the DMARC WG to conclude ARC or not, NOT the details of Trent's
> draft or ARC itself. We'll leave this thread open until Friday, 2/13, at
> 5pm PT.
> 
> Charter proposal:
> https://github.com/ietf-artarea/charters/blob/main/dmarc/charter.md
> Trent's document:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-adams-arc-experiment-conclusion/
> 
> Our options as outlined are:
> 
> 1. Take this document on now in a rechartered DMARC WG to conclude ARC.
> 2. Shutter DMARC WG as intended, and take on this document via AD
>    sponsorship or some other more directed approach.
> 3. Let this document be published with DKIM2 as part of a cluster of
>    documents concluding ARC are shifting to DKIM2 as explicit successor.
> 
> So far, there has been some support for (1) and limited support for (3). 
> There has yet been no support for (2).
>
> Please address only which option you prefer with respect to rechartering 
> the DMARC working group. We'll close this thread out next Friday, 2/13, at 
> 5pm PT.
>
> Seth, chairin'
>
> On Fri, Feb 6, 2026 at 8:03 AM Alessandro Vesely <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> On Fri 06/Feb/2026 09:27:20 +0100 Baptiste Carvello wrote:
>>> Then, assuming that every receiver is an authorized forwarder (which is 
>>> an acceptable assumption in the common case), the whole forwarding trail 
>>> can be followed and verified.
>>
>> This assumption is wrong!  Forwarding requires agreement.
>>
>> Best
>> Ale
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dmarc mailing list -- [e-mail]
>> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dmarc mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]