- Original Message -
From: Murray S. Kucherawy superu...@gmail.com
To: dmarc@ietf.org
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2015 1:23:48 AM
Subject: [dmarc-ietf] Comments on draft-ietf-dmarc-interoperability
Thanks for putting this together. Here are the results of a late-night
first-time
- Original Message -
From: Murray S. Kucherawy superu...@gmail.com
To: Franck Martin fra...@peachymango.org
Cc: dmarc@ietf.org
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2015 4:36:09 PM
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Comments on draft-ietf-dmarc-interoperability
That diff format is a little challenging
at 4:05 PM, Franck Martin fra...@peachymango.org
wrote:
--
*From: *Murray S. Kucherawy superu...@gmail.com
*To: *dmarc@ietf.org
*Sent: *Friday, January 30, 2015 1:23:48 AM
*Subject: *[dmarc-ietf] Comments on draft-ietf-dmarc-interoperability
Thanks for putting
Thanks for putting this together. Here are the results of a late-night
first-time reading:
Section 2:
The sentence starting This the secondary appears to be mangled. I can't
parse it.
Section 2.1, paragraph 1:
The first sentence reads like a basic tautology: A fundamental aspect of X
is the
