On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 3:58 PM, Brandon Long <[email protected]> wrote:
> > The comment is obviously completely unspecified, though maybe some > inferences can be done... though I'm not sure what it's saying myself. > > Are we attempting to dictate the comment? Or is that just an example and > it could be anything? > In the draft, the comment was simply an example. That's why there is no further explanation of "required content". If we want to specify how local-policy is reported, I think we risk derailing the spec, though I understand the desire for a tightly specified syntax and content. The consumption of it will be for people who process reports. We had asked various folks from current processors and got no particular input earlier. --Kurt
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
