Re: [dmarc-ietf] Ticket #80 - DMARCbis Should Have Clear and Concise Definition of DMARC

Todd Herr <todd.herr@valimail.com> Tue, 19 January 2021 21:36 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20201231192500.1B3483F0176B@ary.qy> <be0601ec-7e50-f280-4cf4-66c3b4ac7fa5@tana.it> <CAHej_8mNzuAys9V0BHCk9o=6rzK9vEpZ6Db3OE4zA+E=vXhrjw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHej_8mNzuAys9V0BHCk9o=6rzK9vEpZ6Db3OE4zA+E=vXhrjw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Todd Herr <todd.herr@valimail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2021 16:35:39 -0500
Message-ID: <CAHej_8nDVD8yYKVS24TPd3GaCs_0Yptg+hYQ_usTQ5xoOnJ-=g@mail.gmail.com>
To: IETF DMARC WG <dmarc@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000009ef6cc05b9479fe7"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/vIBmQbrSp9TB9YctPEvuJr5nk4I>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Ticket #80 - DMARCbis Should Have Clear and Concise Definition of DMARC
Precedence: list

I am going to close this ticket.

I have opened ticket 96, Tweaks to Abstract and Introduction
<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/dmarc/ticket/96>, for Ale's suggestions and for
any tweaks that John might still suggest.

On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 8:36 AM Todd Herr <todd.herr@valimail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 7:25 AM Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it> wrote:
>
>> On Thu 31/Dec/2020 20:24:59 +0100 John Levine wrote:
>> > In article <CAHej_8kkuQR3_LiV_O5Z-EPvVeZrdTPvCiK7rOmWKxQKsp=
>> 6pA@mail.gmail.com> you write:
>> >>
>> >>Dave Crocker submitted some suggestions on-list, and I noodled a bit
>> with
>> >>the text myself, and submit the following for your collective
>> consideration:
>> >
>> > I have a few minor editorial tweaks to suggest but they can wait.  I
>> think
>> > we should use this text.
>>
>>
>> +1, I see it's not yet on github.  Please go ahead, possibly posting a
>> .txt as
>> well, so we can run IETF's diff tool.
>>
>>
>>
> Updated version, including .txt but without your suggested minor tweaks,
> is posted here -
> https://github.com/ietf-wg-dmarc/draft-ietf-dmarc-dmarcbis
>
> Note that lack of inclusion of your minor tweaks obviously does not mean
> that they've been rejected; I just wanted to complete the process of
> checking in a new branch, doing a pull request, and merging the new branch
> with main.
>
> --
>
> *Todd Herr* | Sr. Technical Program Manager
> *e:* todd.herr@valimail.com
> *p:* 703.220.4153
>
>
> This email and all data transmitted with it contains confidential and/or
> proprietary information intended solely for the use of individual(s)
> authorized to receive it. If you are not an intended and authorized
> recipient you are hereby notified of any use, disclosure, copying or
> distribution of the information included in this transmission is prohibited
> and may be unlawful. Please immediately notify the sender by replying to
> this email and then delete it from your system.
>

-- 

*Todd Herr* | Sr. Technical Program Manager
*e:* todd.herr@valimail.com
*p:* 703.220.4153

This email and all data transmitted with it contains confidential and/or
proprietary information intended solely for the use of individual(s)
authorized to receive it. If you are not an intended and authorized
recipient you are hereby notified of any use, disclosure, copying or
distribution of the information included in this transmission is prohibited
and may be unlawful. Please immediately notify the sender by replying to
this email and then delete it from your system.

[dmarc-ietf] Ticket #80 - DMARCbis Should Have Cl… Todd Herr
Re: [dmarc-ietf] Ticket #80 - DMARCbis Should Hav… John Levine
Re: [dmarc-ietf] Ticket #80 - DMARCbis Should Hav… Alessandro Vesely
Re: [dmarc-ietf] Ticket #80 - DMARCbis Should Hav… Todd Herr
Re: [dmarc-ietf] Ticket #80 - DMARCbis Should Hav… Todd Herr