My preference would be the first one seems clearer to me >> authfailure-report modifies ARF >> - dkim-reporting modifies DKIM and ADSP >> - spf-reporting modifies SPF >
On Jul 6, 2011, at 3:19 PM, Barry Leiba <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Which of the following, if any, is correct? >> >>> A The ARF extension will gain in comprehensibility by removing >>> any method-specific detail. >> >> That would be my preference. > > So, in terms of Murray's message (see below), which arrangement are > you agreeing with? > > Barry > > Murray said... >> Ignoring redaction for the moment, what we have now is: >> >> - authfailure-report modifies ARF >> - dkim-reporting modifies DKIM and ADSP >> - spf-reporting modifies SPF >> >> That seems nice and clean. Your proposal changes it to: >> >> - authfailure-report modifies ARF >> - dkim-reporting modifies DKIM and ADSP, and also modifies authfailure- >> report >> - spf-reporting modifies SPF, and also modifies authfailure-report >> >> At a glance the first method seems cleaner to me. On the other hand, the >> latter is a more clear demonstration of how future email authentication >> methods will need to create reporting hooks. >> >> What do others think? > _______________________________________________ > marf mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf _______________________________________________ marf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf
