Another one I just found, the BNF doesn't seem to permit the last field to end with a dmarc-sep, but this seems like a desirable sort of thing to allow.
Michael On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 09:49:03PM +0000, Murray Kucherawy wrote: > Nope, you're right, it's a bug in the doc. It'll be fixed in the next > version. > > This is the right place to report such problems. So, thanks for the > report! > > -MSK > > On 10/3/12 1:58 PM, "Michael Stevens" <[email protected]> wrote: > > >Hi. > > > >I'm working on implementing a dmarc record parser from > >http://www.dmarc.org/draft-dmarc-base-00-02.txt > > > >The BNF for dmarc-ainterval looks wrong: > > > > dmarc-ainterval = %x72.69 *WSP "=" *WSP > > > >on page 21. > > > >Presumably this should allow a number after the final *WSP? > > > >Is this the best place to report problems? > > > >I'm experimentally allowing \d+ there. > > > >Michael > >_______________________________________________ > >dmarc-discuss mailing list > >[email protected] > >http://www.dmarc.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc-discuss > > > >NOTE: Participating in this list means you agree to the DMARC Note Well > >terms (http://www.dmarc.org/note_well.html) > > > _______________________________________________ > dmarc-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.dmarc.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc-discuss > > NOTE: Participating in this list means you agree to the DMARC Note Well terms > (http://www.dmarc.org/note_well.html) _______________________________________________ dmarc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://www.dmarc.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc-discuss NOTE: Participating in this list means you agree to the DMARC Note Well terms (http://www.dmarc.org/note_well.html)
