> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Scott > Kitterman > Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 11:56 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [marf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-marf-spf-reporting-03.txt > > This isn't actually a DSN (is it)? Perhaps "Similar to Section 2 of > [DSN} ..." instead of "Per Section 2 of [DSN] ..."?
It's not a DSN proper, right, but we still want to avoid the same situations that DSN has to avoid. > > 2) I've changed "r=" to "ra=" so that all of the reporting tags are > > distinguishable as "r[a-z]". Seem reasonable for yours as well? > > Sure. Done locally. I notice in your draft you use two styles for the ABNF > specification: > > rep-ra-tag = %x72.61 > spf-rp-tag = %x72 %x69 > > The SPF draft uses the latter format. Is one of these preferred? I > suspect it would be better to pick one form and stick with it over > using two (I'm not an ABNF expert at all, so please advise). I'll switch it to the first. I tried to get them all but I must've missed some. -MSK _______________________________________________ marf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf
