On Fri, May 7, 2021 at 9:46 AM John Levine wrote:
> > 2. I’d welcome other inputs here on the original idea for this
> option. I would imagine modern systems would be able to deal with rather
> >large XML files, though MTAs routinely set limits under 50M for accepting
> messages.
>
> I
It appears that Brotman, Alex said:
> 2. I’d welcome other inputs here on the original idea for this option. I
> would imagine modern systems would be able to deal with rather
>large XML files, though MTAs routinely set limits under 50M for accepting
>messages.
I suggested an option to
.org
Subject: [dmarc-ietf] nits in draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-02
I'm not quite sure how I'm supposed to submit nitpickery like this, so if
there's a better forum please let me know.
1. Filename & content-type
Section 2.6.1 among other things says that the name for the mime-part
co
It appears that Martin Kealey said:
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>
>I'm not quite sure how I'm supposed to submit nitpickery like this, so if
>there's a better forum please let me know.
>
>1. Filename & content-type
>
>Section 2.6.1 among other things says that the name for the mime-part
>containing the report
I'm not quite sure how I'm supposed to submit nitpickery like this, so if
there's a better forum please let me know.
1. Filename & content-type
Section 2.6.1 among other things says that the name for the mime-part
containing the report MUST end with ".xml" or ".xml.gz", yet the example
given
