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
dmarc-discuss@dmarc.org
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)

Reply via email to