My suggestion is delete all of it. It's accurate for some cases, not for others. If you want to keep any of it, I think it needs to be properly caveated. I expect that would be a Sisyphean task that's not worth the effort.
Scott K On April 25, 2023 2:54:46 PM UTC, "Brotman, Alex" <[email protected]> wrote: >> As explained in 6.1, that's not actually true if the domains are small >> enuogh. >> In some of my tiny domains I can often recognize individual messages I've >> sent. I'd just delete these sentences. > >I'd argue that you're in a (mostly) unique situation where you're the sender >and the report reviewer. That being said, would you prefer I remove all of >6.3? Does the remaining sentence have enough value to keep? Or sweep it up to >6.1? > >-- >Alex Brotman >Sr. Engineer, Anti-Abuse & Messaging Policy >Comcast > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: John R. Levine <[email protected]> >> Sent: Monday, April 24, 2023 10:18 PM >> To: Brotman, Alex <[email protected]>; [email protected] >> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate- >> reporting-09.txt >> >> > I removed the small section that faced objections. >> > >> > I updated the ridtxt definition and discovered that mmark was making a >> mess of those asterisks. When there are more than one/some on a single >> line, it believes you would like some subset to be defined as "<em>" things. >> >> Looks pretty good. Minor points: >> >> The first paragraph in 2.6 says: >> >> Where the URI specified in a "rua" tag does not specify otherwise, a >> Mail Receiver generating a feedback report SHOULD employ a secure >> transport mechanism. >> >> Since the only mechanism is mail and nobody's going to S/MIME encrypt their >> reports, I suggest just deleting it. >> >> 6.3: >> >> Mail Receivers should have no concerns in sending reports as they do >> not contain personal information. ... >> >> Domain Owners should have no concerns in receiving reports as they do >> not contain personal information. >> >> As explained in 6.1, that's not actually true if the domains are small >> enuogh. >> In some of my tiny domains I can often recognize individual messages I've >> sent. I'd just delete these sentences. >> >> R's, >> John >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: dmarc <[email protected]> On Behalf Of >> >> [email protected] >> >> Sent: Monday, April 24, 2023 7:39 PM >> >> To: [email protected] >> >> Cc: [email protected] >> >> Subject: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: >> >> draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-09.txt >> >> >> >> >> >> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >> directories. >> >> This Internet-Draft is a work item of the Domain-based Message >> >> Authentication, Reporting & Conformance (DMARC) WG of the IETF. >> >> >> >> Title : DMARC Aggregate Reporting >> >> Author : Alex Brotman >> >> Filename : draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-09.txt >> >> Pages : 28 >> >> Date : 2023-04-24 >> >> >> >> Abstract: >> >> DMARC allows for domain holders to request aggregate reports from >> >> receivers. This report is an XML document, and contains extensible >> >> elements that allow for other types of data to be specified later. >> >> The aggregate reports can be submitted to the domain holder's >> >> specified destination as supported by the receiver. >> >> >> >> This document (along with others) obsoletes RFC7489. >> >> >> >> The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is: >> >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ie >> >> tf-dmarc- >> >> aggregate- >> >> >> reporting/__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!HBzOZHijNkg7AyDQnUKsIyEGZaJcT2dIFMGNVy >> qsr7 >> >> nLWuCbVwCDo_mqKdBpLG2eSmAWmSaOYcZxRLwpzMl1GqF46TKSvg$ >> >> >> >> There is also an HTML version available at: >> >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-iet >> >> f-dmarc- >> >> aggregate-reporting- >> >> >> 09.html__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!HBzOZHijNkg7AyDQnUKsIyEGZaJcT2dIFMGNVyqsr >> 7nL >> >> WuCbVwCDo_mqKdBpLG2eSmAWmSaOYcZxRLwpzMl1GqEqNRr1SA$ >> >> >> >> A diff from the previous version is available at: >> >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2 >> >> =draft- >> >> ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting- >> >> >> 09__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!HBzOZHijNkg7AyDQnUKsIyEGZaJcT2dIFMGNVyqsr7nLW >> uC >> >> bVwCDo_mqKdBpLG2eSmAWmSaOYcZxRLwpzMl1GqFdWqTU2g$ >> >> >> >> Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at >> >> rsync.ietf.org::internet-drafts >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> dmarc mailing list >> >> [email protected] >> >> >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc >> __;! >> >> >> !CQl3mcHX2A!HBzOZHijNkg7AyDQnUKsIyEGZaJcT2dIFMGNVyqsr7nLWuCbV >> wCD >> >> o_mqKdBpLG2eSmAWmSaOYcZxRLwpzMl1GqEDBiM7_A$ >> > >> > >> >> Regards, >> John Levine, [email protected], Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for >> Dummies", Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. <a >> href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://jl.ly__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!Fpku2qYC >> TuZKAA4K08a9mXXHN3ECaWvI28GCiy40HeEi8kyMh5bKjQWeT7UFbqsfeN5N >> v88e0Nj1WqU$">https://jl.ly</a> > >_______________________________________________ >dmarc mailing list >[email protected] >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
