Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-28: Discuss
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- DISCUSS: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Please include normative references for the different formal languages used in this document (i.e., schema and ABNF) -- Section 2.1.1 and Appendix A. The format for these reports is defined in the XML Schema Definition (XSD) in Appendix A. Please provide a normative reference to XSD. Perhaps: [W3C.SCHEMA] Thompson, H., Beech, D., Maloney, M., and N. Mendelsohn, "XML Schema Part 1: Structures Second Edition", W3C Recommendation REC-xmlschema-1-20041028, October 2004, <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/>. [W3C.SCHEMA.DTYPES] Biron, P. and A. Malhotra, "XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes Second Edition", W3C Recommendation REC-xmlschema- 2-20041028, October 2004, <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/>. -- Section 2.5.1 and 2.5.2 The RFC5322.Subject field for individual report submissions MUST conform to the following ABNF: Please provide a normative reference for ABNF. Perhaps: [RFC5234] Crocker, D., Ed. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234, DOI 10.17487/RFC5234, January 2008, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5234>. ** human_result. It appears that there is at least one data element (human_result per Sections 2.1.1.12 and 2.1.1.13) which is intended to be a human readable string. Per Section 4 of RFC2277 saying “protocols that transfer text MUST provide for carrying information about the language of that text”, what is the approach prescribed by this specification? Should an xs:lang attribute be added to the human_result element? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Given how [I-D.ietf-dmarc-dmarcbis] is cited numerous times to provide clarity for normative guidance, why is it an informative reference? ** From idnits: ** The abstract seems to contain references ([RFC7489], [I-D.ietf-dmarc-dmarcbis], [I-D.ietf-dmarc-failure-reporting]), which it shouldn't. Please replace those with straight textual mentions of the documents in question. ** Section 6.3. Editorial. This leakage could potentially be utilized as part of a program of pervasive surveillance (see [RFC7624]]). The extra “]]” is causing an idnits error. _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
