Noting again that my comments are non-blocking (so you should feel free to ignore me:-), but ...
On 22/06/16 06:08, Kurt Andersen wrote: >> > - I think the abstract and intro would be better if they >> > explicitly ack'd that DMARC affects mailing lists. . . > While mailing lists can be adversely impacted, I don't think s/can/are/ above, as previously agreed. > that they are necessarily more impacted than the other items > which are called out in the body of the document. > It is IMO entirely noteworthy that the primary mechanism used to discuss the definition of mail protocols, including this one, has been adversely affected by this mail protocol. One can quite rightly and fairly claim that that trade-off is overall a win for the mail ecosystem, but not being explicit about what has been the biggest downside of dmarc, from the IETF participant perspective, seems plain wrong. S.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
