Hi Alessandro,
At 04:38 29-12-2011, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
Sections 6 and 7 are dedicated to solicited feedback. However, there
is a number of points that should be valid also for unsolicited
reports. If the order is not important, the common points could be
put in a common section. Specifically, for the sending part, Section
6, here's the points I think should be common and why:
It's the beginning of the year. I have some difficulty understanding
what changes you suggested.
the provided ARF fields. This concept needs to be stated, though.
The beginning of the third paragraph of Section 8 can be changed so as
to read like so:
Recipients of unsolicited ARF reports SHOULD, in general, handle them
the same way as any other abuse reports. However, they can take
advantage of the ARF format to automate processing. Lacking [etc.]
I don't understand what change you are asking for as there is such
text in Section 8. Could you ask the editor of the document to
generate a revision with your changes as it would be easier to read
and comment?
BTW, as this draft is about an applicability statement, I would
expect it to be clear about how the technical specifications it
references should be used. Text such as "Provider generating the
reports SHOULD NOT assume that the operator receiving" is more of an
assumption that the key word will "make things happen" than some
requirement that will help in the deployment of the specifications.
In my opinion, the document needs much more work to be ready for a Last Call.
Thanks,
-sm
_______________________________________________
marf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf
