On 26/Feb/12 05:39, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: > > We have been given a 5:10pm slot for one hour on Tuesday at the Paris > IETF Meeting.
That's the same session as the MILE slot. In Taipei, Kathleen asked whether any MARF participant was present... I don't know whether she's going to repeat that in Paris. The issue is about a format to marshal ARF reports inside IODEF incidents, as John mentioned in http://mipassoc.org/pipermail/abuse-feedback-report/2009q3/000264.html See http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-vesely-mile-mail-abuse for a proposed naked format. If LIRs are serious about mandatory abuse-mailboxes, they may actually need something like that. Do we have hints about how applications can handle xmllized ARF messages? > This should be the last time this WG meets as by then all of our > deliverables should have completed their IETF Last Calls and be on > their way to the IESG. No rechartering? Indeed, it seems we've even done some of the tasks --but not all-- that we thought we'd have to recharter for, see http://mipassoc.org/pipermail/abuse-feedback-report/2009q4/000463.html Le MARF est mort, vive le MARF! _______________________________________________ marf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf
