On 10/12/16 03:17, Steven M Jones via dmarc-discuss wrote: > On 10/12/16 02:00, Roland Turner via dmarc-discuss wrote: >> >> Consider https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc >> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc> >> > > +1.
Let me clarify a bit -- the dmarc-discuss list is very much an appropriate forum for the kind of operational topic Juri raised. Implementation issues, operational questions/issues, etc -- all good for this list. But for things that appear to be more than that, the IETF WG is a better place to take them. And I think that if you consider current handling of size limits, planning for growing report sizes in the near future, and an additional report transport - all those together - it seems an appropriate bundle to take to the WG. --S.
_______________________________________________ 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)
