Inline below -- Alex Brotman Sr. Engineer, Anti-Abuse & Messaging Policy Comcast
> -----Original Message----- > From: Roman Danyliw via Datatracker <[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, February 17, 2025 12:12 PM > To: The IESG <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: Roman Danyliw's Discuss on draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-28: > (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) > > 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://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/state > ments/handling-ballot- > positions/__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!HxEIPOcoWA2n8PybYAw3A4KCs8z31wUqIbwA > v3PqZUQBhwnGbzJjmqn8vDUzeTBpypCRG33AaARj8NZeOdU$ > for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf- > dmarc-aggregate- > reporting/__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!HxEIPOcoWA2n8PybYAw3A4KCs8z31wUqIbwA > v3PqZUQBhwnGbzJjmqn8vDUzeTBpypCRG33AaARjjDAwBG4$ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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, > <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema- > 1/__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!HxEIPOcoWA2n8PybYAw3A4KCs8z31wUqIbwAv3PqZU > QBhwnGbzJjmqn8vDUzeTBpypCRG33AaARjPpdaLFg$ >. > > [W3C.SCHEMA.DTYPES] > Biron, P. and A. Malhotra, "XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes > Second Edition", W3C Recommendation REC-xmlschema- > 2-20041028, October 2004, > <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema- > 2/__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!HxEIPOcoWA2n8PybYAw3A4KCs8z31wUqIbwAv3PqZU > QBhwnGbzJjmqn8vDUzeTBpypCRG33AaARjAtMMeqs$ >. > Added. Also, W3C references are not nearly as simple as RFC references in markdown. Or I'm not nearly as familiar. > -- 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://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc- > editor.org/rfc/rfc5234__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!HxEIPOcoWA2n8PybYAw3A4KCs8z3 > 1wUqIbwAv3PqZUQBhwnGbzJjmqn8vDUzeTBpypCRG33AaARjmWOgvSU$ > >. Done > > ** 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? > I'll be honest that I don't have a preference here. Someone else called this out I believe as well. If others believe it necessary, I will certainly add it to the document. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ** Given how [I-D.ietf-dmarc-dmarcbis] is cited numerous times to provide > clarity for normative guidance, why is it an informative reference? This was a typo for one of the references (the last one). Corrected. > > ** 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. Moved elsewhere > > ** 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. > Resolved > _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
