> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Hilda > Fontana > Sent: Friday, October 21, 2011 8:10 AM > To: 'Alessandro Vesely'; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [marf] New Version Notification - > draft-ietf-marf-authfailure-report-03.txt > > Is it fair to say we have consensus on the one report per failure?
I believe there's rough consensus supporting one report per failure. > What is the final verdict on the DKIM-Canonicalized-Body? How should it be > phrased in the doc? I just proposed a replacement description. If there are no objections, we can run with it. I'll start a second WGLC on your -04 when I see it, but please wait a few days in case anyone else wants to chime in on either issue. -MSK _______________________________________________ marf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf
