Re: [dmarc-ietf] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol-13.txt

2018-04-04 Thread Kurt Andersen (b)
On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 3:32 PM, Brandon Long wrote: > Hmm, I guess this means the set of required/optional fields now stretches > between the DKIM and ARC specs, eh? > > Is t the only one that's now optional? > > For Seal, I have i, a, s, d, b, cv (removed t based on this

Re: [dmarc-ietf] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol-13.txt

2018-04-04 Thread Brandon Long
Hmm, I guess this means the set of required/optional fields now stretches between the DKIM and ARC specs, eh? Is t the only one that's now optional? For Seal, I have i, a, s, d, b, cv (removed t based on this thread) For AMS, I have i, a, s, c, d, d, b, h, bh Brandon On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at

Re: [dmarc-ietf] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol-13.txt

2018-04-03 Thread Jeremy Harris
On 21/03/18 15:18, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: > On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 3:00 PM, wrote: > >> A new version of I-D, draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol-13.txt >> has been successfully submitted by Kurt Andersen and posted to the >> IETF repository. I see that Google are still

Re: [dmarc-ietf] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol-13.txt

2018-03-21 Thread Murray S. Kucherawy
On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 3:00 PM, wrote: > A new version of I-D, draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol-13.txt > has been successfully submitted by Kurt Andersen and posted to the > IETF repository. > > Name: draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol > Revision: 13 > Title: