I believe it is correct, SHOULD strive to trusted known sources. The final
mechanism SHOULD be one of (hard) failure. This is what we (ideally) strive
for. I believe anything weaker is a waste of computational resources, causes
confusion using neutral or even soft fails especially with
Generally they will leave it and mark Obsolete. This should be called out
in the RFC.
(I have not looked right now).
tim
On Fri, Mar 8, 2024 at 11:42 AM Murray S. Kucherawy
wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 8, 2024 at 6:49 AM Alessandro Vesely wrote:
>
>> since we removed the rf= tag (format of failure
On Fri, Mar 8, 2024 at 6:49 AM Alessandro Vesely wrote:
> since we removed the rf= tag (format of failure reports), do we still
> need to tackle the IANA registry? Since we only use one format, it
> makes little sense. However, the registry actually exists. Is it
> possible to delete or
Heads up that I'm going to be looking carefully at use of "SHOULD"
throughout the document when it comes to AD Evaluation. An example that
gave me pause:
On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 6:30 AM Alessandro Vesely wrote:
> in section 5.5.1, Publish an SPF Policy for an Aligned Domain, the last
> sentence
Hi,
since we removed the rf= tag (format of failure reports), do we still
need to tackle the IANA registry? Since we only use one format, it
makes little sense. However, the registry actually exists. Is it
possible to delete or obsolete it, or does it have to stay there as a
relict for
On Fri, Mar 8, 2024 at 4:52 AM Alessandro Vesely wrote:
> On 06/03/2024 15:42, Todd Herr wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 10:45 PM Barry Leiba
> wrote:
> >
> >> SHOULD NOT was the consensus call, and the correction Todd
> >> proposes is just making that sentence consistent with that.
>
>
>
On 05/03/2024 17:07, Scott Kitterman wrote:
On March 5, 2024 3:46:39 PM UTC, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
Todd Herr writes:
On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 9:30 AM Alessandro Vesely wrote:
in section 5.5.1, Publish an SPF Policy for an Aligned Domain, the last
sentence says:
On 06/03/2024 15:42, Todd Herr wrote:
On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 10:45 PM Barry Leiba wrote:
SHOULD NOT was the consensus call, and the correction Todd
proposes is just making that sentence consistent with that.
Yet, Section 7.6 still has:
In particular, this document makes explicit that
