On 12/2/2019 8:29 AM, Dave Crocker wrote:
It will help to have folk comment on the IETF mailing list, so that
Klensin's comments don't just get responses from me.
Sorry, wrong venue. The discussion is on the ietf-smtp mailing list, but
the request for others to participate remains!
d/
--
--On Monday, December 2, 2019 09:20 -0800 "Kurt Andersen (b)"
wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 2, 2019 at 9:11 AM John C Klensin
> wrote:
>
>>
>> --On Monday, December 2, 2019 08:29 -0800 Dave Crocker
>> wrote:
>>
>> > On 12/2/2019 7:56 AM, Kurt Andersen (b) wrote:
>> >> There's also already RFC7960
On Mon, Dec 2, 2019 at 9:11 AM John C Klensin wrote:
>
> --On Monday, December 2, 2019 08:29 -0800 Dave Crocker
> wrote:
>
> > On 12/2/2019 7:56 AM, Kurt Andersen (b) wrote:
> >> There's also already RFC7960 which expands upon 5598 with
> >> specific reference to DMARC's impact.
> >
> > ahh.
--On Monday, December 2, 2019 08:29 -0800 Dave Crocker
wrote:
> On 12/2/2019 7:56 AM, Kurt Andersen (b) wrote:
>> There's also already RFC7960 which expands upon 5598 with
>> specific reference to DMARC's impact.
>
> ahh. thanks.
>
> It will help to have folk comment on the IETF mailing
On 12/2/2019 7:56 AM, Kurt Andersen (b) wrote:
There's also already RFC7960 which expands upon 5598 with specific
reference to DMARC's impact.
ahh. thanks.
It will help to have folk comment on the IETF mailing list, so that
Klensin's comments don't just get responses from me.
d/
--
Dave
There's also already RFC7960 which expands upon 5598 with specific
reference to DMARC's impact.
On Sat, Nov 30, 2019 at 7:37 AM Dave Crocker wrote:
> On 11/30/2019 4:40 AM, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
>
> Let me quote this from the ietf-smtp mailing list:
>
> On Sat 30/Nov/2019 00:12:53 +0100 John
