I applied these changes. Thank you, Barry!

On Tue, Nov 20, 2018, at 8:44 PM, Barry Leiba wrote:
> > The Phase I description is still included: "Draft description of
> > interoperability issues for indirect mail..."   Isn't that rfc7960?
> 
> Yeh, we did this too quickly, I'm afraid.  We should make a few other
> minor changes to reflect the now-past:
> 
> OLD
>    The existing DMARC base specification has been submitted as an
>    Independent Submission to become an Informational RFC.
> NEW
>    The existing DMARC base specification is published as Informational
>    RFC 7489.
> END
> 
> OLD
>       Draft description of interoperability issues for indirect mail
>       flows and plausible methods for reducing them.
> NEW
>       Draft description of interoperability issues for indirect mail
>       flows and plausible methods for reducing them.  This is now
>       complete and published as RFC 7960.
> END
> 
> OLD
>       Specification of DMARC improvements to support indirect mail flows
> NEW
>       Specification of DMARC improvements to support indirect mail flows;
>       this is now complete as draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol
> END
> 
> Alexey, will you make those changes, please?
> -- 
> Barry
> 

_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc

Reply via email to