I support Trent’s charter and believe it is adequate for the sake of determining consensus.
laura > On 9 Mar 2026, at 14:49, Seth Blank <[email protected]> wrote: > > Let's come back to the charter, please. > > To those who chimed in on this thread, it seems to me that most of you are OK > with the charter as Trent proposed it, due to the resistance to Ale's > proposed language. Can you please be explicit on if you think Trent's > proposed charter is adequate for the sake of determining consensus? > > We can talk merits of ARC and how to conclude the experiment AFTER a charter > is locked in and approved by the IESG. > > Seth, as Chair > > On Mon, Mar 9, 2026 at 10:15 AM Alessandro Vesely <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> Yes, ARC has been tested, but without any authorization component. This >> allows >> us to identify the forwarder and learn its filtering approach, but without >> knowing whether the forwarding is authorized, this information is useless. >> >> Different solutions, such as DKIM2, are supposedly better than ARC, but, >> again, >> they don't provide any authorization system. Therefore, they probably won't >> solve the mailing list problem either. And they won't be coming anytime >> soon. >> >> I'm asking the WG to consider a simple authorization scheme which could >> address >> the forwarding issue. This draft was not considered at the time because >> Phase >> II, "Specification of DMARC Improvements to Support Indirect Mail Flows", >> was >> considered complete with the publication of ARC. >> >> In this context, once authorization is granted, ARC appears to be slightly >> preferable to DKIM for authentication, thanks to the addition of the AAR >> field. >> This is not /focusing/ on ARC, but simply using it for what it's worth. >> >> >> Best >> Ale >> >> On Mon 09/Mar/2026 12:49:58 +0100 Laura Atkins wrote: >> > +1 to Alex’s message. There are ongoing efforts to address the damage >> > DMARC has done to legitimate indirect mail flows. ARC has been tested and >> > no one working with large mail flows seems to think that it’s a viable >> > solution. Focusing on ARC will prevent other solutions from being tested >> > and tried. It’s time to give up on ARC and look at different solutions. >> > >> > laura >> > >> >> On 9 Mar 2026, at 11:44, Brotman, Alex <[email protected] >> >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> >> >> Doug, >> >> >> >> I’m not sure why you equate lack of support for ARC with lack of interest >> >> in solving the “mailing list” problem. I think there are many parties >> >> interested in solving that case, and they’ve determined that ARC isn’t >> >> that solution. Or perhaps, isn’t the solution they want due to other >> >> issues that come with implementation (which are enumerated in Trent’s >> >> draft). I’d say based on the interest in DKIM2, there are parties >> >> interested in resolving that particular problem. >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Alex Brotman >> >> Sr. Engineer, Anti-Abuse & Messaging Policy >> >> Comcast >> >> >> >> From: Douglas Foster <[email protected] >> >> <mailto:[email protected]> >> >> <mailto:[email protected] >> >> <mailto:[email protected]>>> >> >> Sent: Monday, March 9, 2026 7:15 AM >> >> To: Laura Atkins <[email protected] >> >> <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected] >> >> <mailto:[email protected]>>> >> >> Cc: IETF DMARC WG <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> >> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> >> >> Subject: [dmarc-ietf] Re: Proposed Recharter to Conclude the ARC >> >> Experiment >> >> >> >> I would certainly like to believe that evaluators need no advice because >> >> they know what they are doing, but the evidence suggests otherwise. >> >> >> >> The "mailbox problem" indicates that evaluators are not acting in the >> >> interest of their users, by blocking acceptable messages that users want. >> >> It also indicates, indirectly, that evaluators are failing their users >> >> because they are configured to accept some malicious impersonation that >> >> they should be blocking. >> >> >> >> Doug Foster >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Mar 9, 2026 at 6:45 AM Laura Atkins <[email protected] >> >> <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected] >> >> <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote: >> >> >> >> On 8 Mar 2026, at 20:59, Murray S. Kucherawy <[email protected] >> >> <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected] >> >> <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote: >> >> >> >> I think we're going in circles here. You're saying there might be value >> >> in ARC worth pursuing, and we won't know unless we try. But for "try" to >> >> happen, there need to be people interested in putting in the work to get >> >> to the answer. I'm not the one that gets to make that call, but I think >> >> there's a dearth of interest in doing so. >> >> >> >> Putting it in the charter doesn't guarantee people will show up to do the >> >> work. In fact, part of chartering a WG is asking "Who will do this work >> >> if we charter it?" and, well, I personally think the answer is plain. >> >> >> >> Following on to this. Big mailbox providers have done the work to >> >> implement ARC signing on their mail. We’ve heard from a few major mailbox >> >> providers they have looked at using the data on the inbound. They aren’t >> >> interested in working on more experiments in ARC. >> >> >> >> I don’t think there’s anything here and we should just end the ARC >> >> experiment. >> >> >> >> laura >> >> >> >> -- >> >> The Delivery Expert >> >> >> >> Laura Atkins >> >> Word to the Wise >> >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> >> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >> >> >> >> Delivery hints and commentary: http://www.wordtothewise.com/blog >> >> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.wordtothewise.com/blog__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!Dln8pxYfwtpEt76WgweiNBTmH9WTb6Wv426tK9l6CB3qC-WZ6H5QG_ZYfVe5RsJ0jADdlwQmwaJ7n7p_O-7N_05kTMLoNCQ$> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> dmarc mailing list -- [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> >> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >> >> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >> >> <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected] >> >> <mailto:[email protected]>> >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > dmarc mailing list -- [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >> > <mailto:[email protected]> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> dmarc mailing list -- [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]> > _______________________________________________ > dmarc mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] -- The Delivery Expert Laura Atkins Word to the Wise [email protected] Delivery hints and commentary: http://www.wordtothewise.com/blog
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
