Before we do that I think we should revisit whether we have one reporting draft or two.

On Thu, 31 Dec 2020, Alessandro Vesely wrote:

On Thu 24/Dec/2020 10:35:10 +0100 Alessandro Vesely wrote:
On Thu 24/Dec/2020 03:39:03 +0100 Tim Wicinski wrote:
I Believe I agree with the current version, but can someone post what we think is the final text?


I posted it here:
https://github.com/ietf-wg-dmarc/draft-ietf-dmarc-failure-reporting

I don't think the text is final, though.  Besides minor tweaks in the first paragraphs of Section 3, the whole discussion about external destinations has to be stroked and replaced with a reference to aggregate reporting.


I removed duplicated text and adjusted references.  Diffs available here:

https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=draft-ietf-dmarc-failure-reporting-00&url2=https://raw.githubusercontent.com/ietf-wg-dmarc/draft-ietf-dmarc-failure-reporting/main/draft-ietf-dmarc-failure-reporting.txt


If the WG agrees, I'd post that as -01 and close ticket #55.


Best
Ale


Regards,
John Levine, [email protected], Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc

Reply via email to