I removed the small section that faced objections.
I updated the ridtxt definition and discovered that mmark was making a mess of those asterisks.
When there are more than one/some on a single line, it believes you would like some subset to
be defined as "" things.
Looks pretty good. Minor
Thanks,
I think this is an improvement over the last version.
Scott K
On Monday, April 24, 2023 7:41:45 PM EDT Brotman, Alex wrote:
> I removed the small section that faced objections.
>
> I updated the ridtxt definition and discovered that mmark was making a mess
> of those asterisks. When
I removed the small section that faced objections.
I updated the ridtxt definition and discovered that mmark was making a mess of
those asterisks. When there are more than one/some on a single line, it
believes you would like some subset to be defined as "" things.
--
Alex Brotman
Sr.
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
directories. This Internet-Draft is a work item of the Domain-based Message
Authentication, Reporting & Conformance (DMARC) WG of the IETF.
Title : DMARC Aggregate Reporting
Author : Alex Brotman
On-list meta-discussion is off topic. Please stop. Keep the discussion to
technical topics that further the goal of arriving at solutions to open
issues.
Further discussion of this on the list will be subject to a 30-day ban from
posting.
Barry
On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 6:02 PM Hector Santos
Barry, Please excuse any expressed anger.
This is not the first time. The "Accidental Offline Post In Public On
Purpose" was intentional posted because he has done it before and it
will serves him no purpose to write his defamation of my character in
private. He got his defaming points
Ok, everyone, let’s take a rest here.
First: John’s message was not nice. We can all agree on that. So…
(1) John, please don’t send messages like that, even off list. You can
clearly see why that’s good advice.
(2) Everyone other than John, please just accept John’s word — I do — that
On 4/24/2023 7:22 AM, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
On Sun 23/Apr/2023 19:20:06 +0200 Hector Santos wrote:
On 4/23/2023 6:10 AM, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
Meanwhile, digressions about ATPS and similar schemes can help
casting some light on future evolution. From: rewriting cannot be
the final
On Sun 23/Apr/2023 19:20:06 +0200 Hector Santos wrote:
On 4/23/2023 6:10 AM, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
Meanwhile, digressions about ATPS and similar schemes can help casting some
light on future evolution. From: rewriting cannot be the final solution; it
is a temporary hack. Digressions
The only justification for dropping the PSD would be to put the
domain owner in control of his organizational boundary. This requires:
- The ability for the evaluator to determine whether the domain owner
designed his data on RFC 7489 or on DMARCbis.
- The ability for the domain owner
10 matches
Mail list logo
