----- Original Message ----- > From: "Rolf E. Sonneveld" <r.e.sonnev...@sonnection.nl> > To: "Tim Draegen" <t...@eudaemon.net> > Cc: "dmarc" <dmarc@ietf.org> > Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 7:48:03 AM > Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Last call for WG comments on "Interoperability > Issues Between DMARC and Indirect Email > Flows" > > Hi, Tim, > > on Sep 7th, I sent a short review of -05, see > https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dmarc/current/msg02942.html. I didn't > see any response, the paragraph I suggested to remove (par. 3.2.5) is still > present in -07. Can anyone comment on the suggestion to move section 3.2.5 > to some (future) BCP document? >
I don't like to remove stuff that is still useful, and as I did not see any support for the removal to an hypothetical future BCP... But I'm happy to do a revision. _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
