I'd like to see the 'SHOULD employ a secure transport mechanism' section added back in. As I mentioned in another message, I think IETF policy based on RFC 7258 supports it. Alternately, something in privacy considerations might be okay. I think it's better to have the SHOULD, but I could live with that.
Scott K On April 26, 2023 1:43:32 AM UTC, "Brotman, Alex" <Alex_Brotman=40comcast....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: >These should be the updates from the last two days or so. (except John's >s/malicious//, already altered for next run) > >I found a few more places where the mmark/xml2rfc process was creating some >improper output, I believe all for the "_report._dmarc" bits. > >-- >Alex Brotman >Sr. Engineer, Anti-Abuse & Messaging Policy >Comcast > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: dmarc <dmarc-boun...@ietf.org> On Behalf Of internet-dra...@ietf.org >> Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2023 9:41 PM >> To: i-d-annou...@ietf.org >> Cc: dmarc@ietf.org >> Subject: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-10.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-10.txt >> Pages : 28 >> Date : 2023-04-25 >> >> 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-ietf-dmarc- >> aggregate- >> reporting/__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!AUTgUGRe7di45Svh_jN7XZhnryGPgrFQpP4mdx6tD >> wFMl2YKIR4sjQUTIMW2ewQJblqMf3vix5bJDc8e936Uj9eizefnNIbRg3g$ >> >> There is also an HTML version available at: >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-dmarc- >> aggregate-reporting- >> 10.html__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!AUTgUGRe7di45Svh_jN7XZhnryGPgrFQpP4mdx6tDwF >> Ml2YKIR4sjQUTIMW2ewQJblqMf3vix5bJDc8e936Uj9eizefn87iG1vQ$ >> >> 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- >> 10__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!AUTgUGRe7di45Svh_jN7XZhnryGPgrFQpP4mdx6tDwFMl2Y >> KIR4sjQUTIMW2ewQJblqMf3vix5bJDc8e936Uj9eizefn_4PgulM$ >> >> Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at >> rsync.ietf.org::internet-drafts >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> dmarc mailing list >> dmarc@ietf.org >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc__;! >> !CQl3mcHX2A!AUTgUGRe7di45Svh_jN7XZhnryGPgrFQpP4mdx6tDwFMl2YKIR4sj >> QUTIMW2ewQJblqMf3vix5bJDc8e936Uj9eizefnZV79dXg$ > >_______________________________________________ >dmarc mailing list >dmarc@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
