"Murray S. Kucherawy <[email protected]> wrote:

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
>Of Alessandro Vesely
>> Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2012 10:45 AM
>> To: [email protected]
>> Subject: [marf] Change request for AS, was Working Group Last Call on
>draft-ietf-marf-as-05
>> 
>> At the risk of being proposed for a treatment, I retract my post and
>> ask that a new section be added to marf-as, about loop avoidance and
>> control of flow.
>> 
>> The new section would cover FBL traffic details such as using VERP
>and
>> replying 552, which are to be used by all of dkim-reporting, spf-
>> reporting, and reporting-discovery.  Read more on, e.g.
>> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/marf/current/msg01910.html
>
>I support the idea of common-factoring what's in
>draft-ietf-marf-dkim-reporting-08, Section 6 and Sections 8.4 through
>8.6, and parallel text in draft-ietf-marf-spf-reporting, or very
>similar text, into the AS.  The AS is supposed to be a statement of
>"this is how we suggest you use ARF" and those strike me as reasonable
>things to include in such a document even without the reporting drafts.
> Do others agree?
>
>If people don't like that idea, then I would instead suggest at least
>removing them from one of the two -reporting drafts and having that one
>reference the other one.  I'm not too keen on the exact same text
>appearing in two documents if we can avoid it.  Again, do others agree?
>
>I don't (currently) agree that the rest of the suggestions at that URL
>particularly benefit either of the documents.  Others should chime in
>on this point as well.

I think the auth failure draft would have been the one to factor it into. 
Adding the AS draft into the mix of the various auth failure drafts will 
confuse things. 

The auth failure and AS use cases are orthogonal in some respects. They 
overlap, but are definitely different.

Scott K
_______________________________________________
marf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf

Reply via email to