Indeed: we're close enough on agg-rep that we needn't worry about whether it gets done.
Barry On Wed, Oct 23, 2024 at 12:41 PM John R. Levine <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, 23 Oct 2024, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 23, 2024 at 9:02 AM John R. Levine <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Section 6.3 of draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting, Feedback Leakage, has > >> five paragraphs on this topic. I think we have it covered. > > > > Up to you, but I'm worried about the low energy here, so the WG might want > > to be careful about forward references that could end up dangling. > > I'd hope the energy would be better spent getting the reporting draft out > than in trying to splice bits of it back into the mail draft. > > As far as I know the aggregate draft is done other than the recent > kerfuffle about the IP address pattern, and I think we have a solution to > that, no pattern and a prose comment pointing to the syntax in RFC 3986. > > R's, > John > > _______________________________________________ > dmarc mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
