On Tuesday, May 11, 2021 4:17:10 PM EDT Barry Leiba wrote: > >>> Section 4.1 > >>> > >>> o Multi-organization PSDs (e.g., ".com") that do not mandate DMARC > >>> > >>> usage: Privacy risks for Organizational Domains that have not > >>> deployed DMARC within such PSDs are significant. For non-DMARC > >>> Organizational Domains, all DMARC feedback will be directed to the > >>> PSO. PSD DMARC is opt-out (by publishing a DMARC record at the > >>> Organizational Domain level) vice opt-in, which would be the more > >>> desirable characteristic. This means that any non-DMARC > >>> organizational domain would have its feedback reports redirected > >>> to the PSO. The content of such reports, particularly for > >>> existing domains, is privacy sensitive. > >>> > >>> It might be worth making some statement about the applicability of PSD > >>> DMARC for such PSDs that do not mandate DMARC usage. (I guess the > >>> following paragraphs mostly play that role, though perhaps editorially > >>> tying them together more clearly is possible.) > >> > >> I'm not sure where you're going on this, but the following paragraphs do > >> try to pull it together. I've been trying to wordsmith these with little > >> luck. > >> > >> Also, it appears that the word "vice" above should be "versus". > > > > I suspected it might :) > > Actually, “vice” as a preposition has a meaning similar to “versus” (you > could look it up).[1] > > That said, I think that “versus” is better known and better understood, so, > despite my general preference to avoid Latin terms and abbreviations, we > should switch to “versus”. > > Barry > > > [1] “You Could Look It Up” is a James Thurber reference: > https://storyoftheweek.loa.org/2010/09/you-could-look-it-up.html
I think replacing vice with 'instead of' would more clearly capture the intent, but I think any of the three options are fine. Scott K _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
