On December 6, 2018 5:39:56 PM UTC, Alessandro Vesely <[email protected]> wrote: >On Sat 01/Dec/2018 02:27:54 +0100 Scott Kitterman wrote: >> >> Perhaps we need to step back and see if there is consensus that the >privacy >> considerations in the draft are substantially correct and if risk >mitigation >> is needed as described. > > >How about expanding on this: > >On Sat 01/Dec/2018 00:37:24 +0100 Scott Kitterman wrote: >> >> I don't think wide open TLDs like .com ought to be stimulating >feedback on >> any lower level elements of the DNS tree. > >IMHO, statistics derived thereof would be an interesting read. I'm not sure I understand? How much would be okay? Scott K _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Lookup Limitations For Pub... Tim Wicinski
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Lookup Limitations For Pub... Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Lookup Limitations For Public Suffix Do... Zeke Hendrickson
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Lookup Limitations For Public Suff... Kurt Andersen (b)
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Lookup Limitations For Public Suff... Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Lookup Limitations For Public Suffix Do... John Levine
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Lookup Limitations For Public Suff... Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Lookup Limitations For Public ... Tim Wicinski
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Lookup Limitations For Pub... Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Lookup Limitations For... Alessandro Vesely
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Lookup Limitation... Scott Kitterman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Lookup Limita... Alessandro Vesely
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Lookup Limita... Scott Kitterman
