Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol-21: Yes
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks to everyone for the work that went into this document. I'm excited by this experiment, and hope it eventually grows into something we can put on the standards track. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- id-nits reports: ** There are 3 instances of too long lines in the document, the longest one being 15 characters in excess of 72. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- §7.2: > remote-ip[1]=10.10.10.13</comment> Please consider using an IPv6 address here. See https://www.iab.org/2016/11/07/iab-statement-on-ipv6/ In any case, please use an address from the ranges reserved by either RFC 5737 or (preferably) RFC 3849. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Appendix B: > Received: from example.org (example.org [208.69.40.157]) ... > Received: from segv.d1.example (segv.d1.example [72.52.75.15]) ... > Received: from [10.10.10.131] (w-x-y-z.dsl.static.isp.com [w.x.y.z]) ... > [208.69.40.157]) by clochette.example.org with ESMTP id The two comments I made on §7.2 apply to these four IP addresses as well. _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
