IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] Pete Resnick's Discuss on draft-ietf-appsawg-email-auth-codes-05: (with DISCUSS)

"Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com> Tue, 05 August 2014 18:15 UTC

Return-Path: <superuser@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D62681A0080; Tue, 5 Aug 2014 11:15:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QiAv0pn0YpyT; Tue, 5 Aug 2014 11:15:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-we0-x230.google.com (mail-we0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c03::230]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 28C481A0067; Tue, 5 Aug 2014 11:15:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-we0-f176.google.com with SMTP id q58so1400576wes.35 for <multiple recipients>; Tue, 05 Aug 2014 11:15:18 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=phqOOG6WZdaTIYPsVfvDnGncIkQiV+XduQDlQG58n4o=; b=V6gQJ4dxGDd73DyZ6TgxggUxkyfO7s55GSKzLHsnw8h0ToZsIUT1ixDqn4j4j92ebe jWmE8uB1izt2ThJK92JBuu0afpYA9AoFt8Cs4H3u+2mAaHriCjpK8IRotE8B3DlGkrFL WdOzNMNTYLEyZn/kfvCRQRW46dzmrexkleBkx17F+m11mrN+iFhVjb7PNnLhXzTPrDj2 X2E16qnRSMcx5EUuLY0khyj2aw+5eDoGTq077207PTdu0BhRHasbLIT3iDrBmEoh9FFe DFEqjvjyTKovDtaeGfg4kQcH0I4zauFpQdwF5iSdj8K6xPJTTaod4ae7DLrgFRwiY1Qn 6eJQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.62.67 with SMTP id w3mr8372327wjr.32.1407262518170; Tue, 05 Aug 2014 11:15:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.180.10.99 with HTTP; Tue, 5 Aug 2014 11:15:18 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <456751dd3cce4deca23c50210f4eb72c@BL2SR01MB605.namsdf01.sdf.exchangelabs.com>
References: <20140805013510.3778.62099.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAL0qLwby0q+VQOKYgJigXw4J1jheBgOqODY48m-VocuYKSfM5g@mail.gmail.com> <53E05B7A.5060308@qti.qualcomm.com> <CAL0qLwaTffcOiXMpCybuzX-j01VgxczS7PSmKbNtOGtSgVYdiQ@mail.gmail.com> <53E05CF1.9000102@qti.qualcomm.com> <456751dd3cce4deca23c50210f4eb72c@BL2SR01MB605.namsdf01.sdf.exchangelabs.com>
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2014 11:15:18 -0700
Message-ID: <CAL0qLwaqrE-bjof0UYdWb0viG-XO3Uy773qhkqwwN5wNbQzB4g@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
To: Terry Zink <tzink@exchange.microsoft.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7b872e9a805fe304ffe5d611"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/apps-discuss/dRfvhs1dnWCRbRSuUotGek-G5nQ
Cc: "appsawg-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <appsawg-chairs@tools.ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-appsawg-email-auth-codes@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-appsawg-email-auth-codes@tools.ietf.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, IETF Apps Discuss <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Pete Resnick's Discuss on draft-ietf-appsawg-email-auth-codes-05: (with DISCUSS)
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2014 18:15:26 -0000

On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 9:35 AM, Terry Zink <tzink@exchange.microsoft.com>
wrote:

>  This is a style nitpick and you can feel free to ignore. I have one
> complaint/suggestion regarding this text:
>
>
>
> Description:       This status code is returned when a message
>                           did not contain any acceptable DKIM
>                           signatures.  (Note that this violates the
>                           advice of Section 6.1 of RFC6376.)
>
>  Description:       This status code is returned when a message
>                           did not contain any acceptable DKIM
>                           signatures whose identifier(s) match the
>                           author address(es) found in the From header
>                           field.  (Note that this violates the advice
>                           of Section 6.1 of RFC6376.)  This is a
>                           special case of the X.7.20 status code.
>
>  The first two words of the phrases “Note that this violates the advice…”
> is redundant and superfluous [1]. In writing, if you have something to
> note, then note it; don’t say “Note that…” In other words, I propose the
> shorter text “This violates the advice…”.
>

Thanks for the suggestion.  If there's another version of the draft, I'll
remove it.  There's adequate discussion of what's going on in the following
section anyway.  If there's no new version, Barry can have the RFC Editor
make that adjustment if he's so inclined.

-MSK

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email