On Wed, Oct 8, 2025 at 4:06 AM Steven M Jones <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 9/28/25 3:38 AM, Alessandro Vesely wrote: > > On Sun 28/Sep/2025 07:34:52 +0200 Steven M Jones wrote: > >> Next up for a final review is section 7. > > > > Wasn't Murray's replacement a review in itself. > > > I just reviewed Murray and Trent's replacement from August 23rd and the > responses. The results are already in the document, and I think they > work well. > > So yes it's been reviewed, but it didn't hurt to make sure there were no > remaining issues. > > > >>> 7. Privacy Considerations The generation and transmission of DMARC > >>> failure reports (sometimes referred to as "forensic reports") raise > >>> significant privacy concerns that must be carefully considered > >>> before deployment. > >> > >> There are just a few of word changes and different RFCs cited in this > >> section under revision -16. Anybody wish to raise any concerns? > > > I was just summarizing the very small changes in this section between > -15 and -16, that's all. I think I meant to include a link to the diff, > but it doesn't matter. I think we can move on. > > --S I can live with the wording as revised. Ship it. Michael Hammer.
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
