[apps-discuss] DMARC BOF Summary

Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> Wed, 31 July 2013 06:43 UTC

Return-Path: <housley@vigilsec.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C2D821F9AC1; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 23:43:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.581
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.581 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.018, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id U8gJfoebOI03; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 23:43:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from odin.smetech.net (mail.smetech.net [208.254.26.82]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 128CF21F9B4B; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 23:43:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (unknown [208.254.26.81]) by odin.smetech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E6BAF2402A; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 02:43:20 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at smetech.net
Received: from odin.smetech.net ([208.254.26.82]) by localhost (ronin.smetech.net [208.254.26.81]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kw-RGXUPwZ09; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 02:43:00 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from dhcp-540a.meeting.ietf.org (dhcp-540a.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.84.10]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by odin.smetech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CD03F2401B; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 02:43:18 -0400 (EDT)
From: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 02:43:00 -0400
Message-Id: <8401A59E-C6EC-4D29-8CDB-03D873F1655E@vigilsec.com>
To: dmarc@ietf.org, "Apps Discuss" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085)
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085)
Subject: [apps-discuss] DMARC BOF Summary
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 06:43:13 -0000

The DMARC base specification is being sponsored by Barry as an individual submission for Proposed Standard.  That specification is not part of the proposed charter.  There was agreement that the specification could use some improvement, but only very minor technical corrections are needed before publication as an RFC.  Several people felt that the DMARC base specification should be part of the proposed working group.

The proposed charter call for extensions to the base specification to add new features as well as BCP about using DMARC.

The sense of the room was that a working group should be formed for these tasks.  In addition, most people felt that the formation of the working group could happen before the DMARC base specification was approved.