Re: [dmarc-ietf] LC feedback on draft-ietf-dmarc-psd-04

2019-07-26 Thread Scott Kitterman
On Friday, July 12, 2019 6:35:31 PM EDT Kurt Andersen (b) wrote: > Please note that I did not review Tim's comments in detail so some of the > following points may have been covered by him previously. > > *Page 2 contains the following paragraph:* > >This memo provides a simple extension to D

Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-psd-04.txt

2019-07-26 Thread Scott Kitterman
On Tuesday, June 4, 2019 6:37:47 PM EDT Tim Draegen wrote: > > On May 27, 2019, at 6:59 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote: > > > > On Monday, May 27, 2019 6:53:17 PM EDT internet-dra...@ietf.org wrote: > >> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > >> directories. This draft is

Re: [dmarc-ietf] draft-ietf-dmarc-psd review

2019-07-26 Thread Scott Kitterman
On Monday, July 22, 2019 12:23:15 PM EDT Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: > Reviewing as the document shepherd: Thanks. I've been working on document updates based on the last call discussion as I have time (xml is in the WG github repo). I think some of these comments will be OBE to those changes,

Re: [dmarc-ietf] Abolishing DMARC policy quarantine

2019-07-26 Thread Alessandro Vesely
On Thu 25/Jul/2019 14:53:55 +0200 Steve Atkins wrote: >> On Jul 25, 2019, at 12:06 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy >> wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 4:45 PM Steve Atkins wrote: >> > It's interesting that the industry has decided to interpret "p=reject; >> > pct=0" the way we intended "p=quaranti