On 4/3/12 3:36 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
Attached is a diff that should satisfy everything Pete just brought up. Please
let me know if there are any objections.
Well, mostly. :-)
On 4/3/12 1:08 PM, Pete Resnick wrote:
5.1.1.
At the time this document is being written, for the use cases
described here, mail operators need to proactively request a
stream of ARF reports from Mailbox Providers. Recommendations
for preparing to make that request are discussed in Section 4.1
of [RFC6449].
Strike "At the time this document is being written, for the use cases
described here". It seems utterly obvious. If you write a new
document with new use cases, you can change the instruction. Also,
why "need to" instead of "MUST"?
1. Mail operators MUST proactively request a stream of ARF reports
from Mailbox Providers. Recommendations for preparing to make
that request are discussed in Section 4.1 of [RFC6449].
Um, OK, that makes it clear why it ought not be a MUST. :-) Seriously
though, you *don't* want to say that *all* mail operators MUST a request
(which is how the sentence currently reads). You probably want to say
that all requests MUST be proactive. The first sentence needs re-arranging.
2. Operators must be able to accept ARF [RFC5965] reports as email
messages [RFC5322] over SMTP [RFC5321]. These and other types of
email messages that can be received are discussed in Section 4.2
of [RFC6449].
Is there a reason that first "must" is not capitalized?
6.2.1
Handling of unsolicited reports has a significant cost to the
receiver. Senders of unsolicited reports, especially those
sending large volumes of them automatically, need to be aware of
this and do all they reasonably can to avoid sending reports that
cannot be used as a basis for action by the recipient, whether
this is due to the report being sent about an incident that is
not abuse-related, the report being sent to an email address that
won't result in action, or the content or format of the report
being hard for the recipient to read or use.
I don't get why 2119 language is being avoided in the above. Why not
s/need to be aware of this and do all they reasonably can to avoid
sending/[MUST/SHOULD] NOT send ?
This was not addressed.
Everything else seems to be covered, and see also my answer to Alessandro.
Thanks.
pr
--
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102
_______________________________________________
marf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf
