> -----Original Message----- > From: John Levine [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 11:21 AM > To: [email protected] > Cc: Murray S. Kucherawy > Subject: Re: [marf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-marf-dkim-reporting-04.txt > > >The bottom part of Section 8.4 talks about not sending these > >automatically, which is kind of in line with what we tell people about > >FBLs. Should this just be normative? It's the same as the DNS idea > >except the indication is explicit rather than something published, and > we're not putting yet another record in the DNS. > > The next question has to be: if you have an external source telling > whose signatures to report, why wouldn't that source also tell you > where to send the reports and how many to send?
Wait, isn't that what I had in the last version, where the reporting address was in the key record in the DNS? _______________________________________________ marf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf
