This is still the most recent version of the SPF reporting draft. I went back and looked and the only open item I'm aware of dealing with the RFC 4408 downref.
It turns out the discussion about if r= should use a full email address or just a localpart were before this draft, so I think the draft reflects what I viewed as the predominate view (I'm quite prepared to find out I was wrong). While people are in the fram of mind of review MARF drafts, please give this one a once over and let me know if anything else needs to be addressed. Scott K ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Subject: [marf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-marf-spf-reporting-02.txt Date: Monday, October 24, 2011, 08:29:30 AM From: [email protected] To: [email protected] CC: [email protected] A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Messaging Abuse Reporting Format Working Group of the IETF. Title : SPF Authentication Failure Reporting using the Abuse Report Format Author(s) : Scott Kitterman Filename : draft-ietf-marf-spf-reporting-02.txt Pages : 14 Date : 2011-10-24 This memo presents extensions to the Abuse Reporting Format (ARF), and Sender Policy Framework (SPF) specifications to allow for detailed reporting of message authentication failures in an on-demand fashion. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-marf-spf-reporting-02.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-marf-spf-reporting-02.txt _______________________________________________ marf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf ----------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ marf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf
