John Levine wrote on 2021-05-10 17:21: > It appears that Matthäus Wander <mail@wander.science> said: >> 1) #33 suggests to add a versioned XML namespace declaration in the root >> <feedback> element. >> https://trac.ietf.org/trac/dmarc/ticket/33 >> >> I support the use of the namespace declaration. > > >> 4) How does the report generator know which format version the consumer >> supports? > > It doesn't. If we change the schema, a lot of report parsers will break. > What actual > real world problem does this change solve?
The schema is broken already. See: https://trac.ietf.org/trac/dmarc/ticket/44 https://trac.ietf.org/trac/dmarc/ticket/45 https://www.uriports.com/blog/dmarc-reports-ietf-rfc-compliance/ The point is to fix the schema. > I haven't seen a lot of ill-formed reports. You obviously haven't tried XSD validation. Regards, Matt _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
