Hi Tim,
On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 04:45:02PM -0400, Tim Wicinski wrote:
> Ben
>
> On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 1:04 AM Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker <
> nore...@ietf.org> wrote:
>
> > Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for
> > draft-ietf-dmarc-psd-12: Discuss
> >
> > When respond
Ben
On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 1:04 AM Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker <
nore...@ietf.org> wrote:
> Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-dmarc-psd-12: Discuss
>
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in t
On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 4:38 PM Roman Danyliw via Datatracker <
nore...@ietf.org> wrote:
> Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-dmarc-psd-12: No Objection
>
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the
On Mon 10/May/2021 17:28:20 +0200 Dave Crocker wrote:
On 5/10/2021 7:10 AM, Matthäus Wander wrote:
I support the use of the namespace declaration. A report with namespace
declaration allows for automatic syntax checks with XML Schema
Validation.
Version numbers, and the like, tend to be a lot
On Mon, 10 May 2021, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
Indeed. I check DMARC on all my incoming mail, but it is unlikely
that I will ever get around to sending reports.
It'd be interesting to know what refrains you to do DMARC aggregate reports.
It's a large amount of programming work to manage the d
NOTE: adjusted ticket number, #23 to #62
On Sat 08/May/2021 20:51:15 +0200 John Levine wrote:
It appears that Murray S. Kucherawy said:
Personally, I think mandatory reporting wouldn't survive Last Call or IESG
Evaluation. Even if it did, there's no mechanism to enforce it ...
Indeed. I c
John Levine wrote on 2021-05-10 17:21:
> It appears that Matthäus Wander said:
>> 1) #33 suggests to add a versioned XML namespace declaration in the root
>> element.
>> https://trac.ietf.org/trac/dmarc/ticket/33
>>
>> I support the use of the namespace declaration.
>
>
>> 4) How does the repo
On 5/10/2021 7:10 AM, Matthäus Wander wrote:
I support the use of the namespace declaration. A report with namespace
declaration allows for automatic syntax checks with XML Schema
Validation.
Version numbers, and the like, tend to be a lot less useful than
intuition leads one to expect.
The
It appears that Matthäus Wander said:
>1) #33 suggests to add a versioned XML namespace declaration in the root
> element.
>https://trac.ietf.org/trac/dmarc/ticket/33
>
>I support the use of the namespace declaration.
>4) How does the report generator know which format version the consumer
>sup
1) #33 suggests to add a versioned XML namespace declaration in the root
element.
https://trac.ietf.org/trac/dmarc/ticket/33
I support the use of the namespace declaration. A report with namespace
declaration allows for automatic syntax checks with XML Schema
Validation. XSD validators refuse to
On Sat, May 8, 2021 at 2:12 PM Murray S. Kucherawy
wrote:
> On Sat, May 8, 2021 at 7:31 AM Alessandro Vesely wrote:
>
>> > - #62 makes reporting mandatory, which leaves the mail receiver with no
>> > means to mitigate the privacy threat.
>>
>
> #62 (assuming it has WG consensus) makes it clear w
11 matches
Mail list logo
