[apps-discuss] Fwd: RFC 6449 on Complaint Feedback Loop Operational Recommendations

Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> Thu, 17 November 2011 06:16 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
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 8052A21F979A for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 22:16:18 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.956
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.956 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.643, 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 LtBNS5g9BCQM for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 22:16:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from hoffman.proper.com (IPv6.Hoffman.Proper.COM [IPv6:2605:8e00:100:41::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB08621F9799 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 22:16:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dhcp-2121.meeting.ietf.org (dhcp-2121.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.33.33]) (authenticated bits=0) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.4/8.14.3) with ESMTP id pAH6GFrj097210 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 23:16:17 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org)
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 14:16:17 +0800
References: <20111117045856.117E6B1E003@rfc-editor.org>
To: apps-discuss Discuss <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Message-Id: <B2896927-475F-41A7-8D87-336B672A4D9B@vpnc.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1251.1)
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1251.1)
Subject: [apps-discuss] Fwd: RFC 6449 on Complaint Feedback Loop Operational Recommendations
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: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 06:16:18 -0000

Of interest to folks here...

Begin forwarded message:

> From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
> Subject: RFC 6449 on Complaint Feedback Loop Operational Recommendations
> Date: November 17, 2011 12:58:54 PM GMT+08:00
> To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
> Cc: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
> 
> 
> A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.
> 
> 
>        RFC 6449
> 
>        Title:      Complaint Feedback Loop Operational Recommendations 
>        Author:     J. Falk, Ed.
>        Status:     Informational
>        Stream:     IETF
>        Date:       November 2011
>        Mailbox:    ietf@cybernothing.org
>        Pages:      31
>        Characters: 75139
>        Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso:   None
> 
>        I-D Tag:    draft-jdfalk-maawg-cfblbcp-03.txt
> 
>        URL:        http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6449.txt
> 
> Complaint Feedback Loops similar to those described herein have
> existed for more than a decade, resulting in many de facto standards
> and best practices.  This document is an attempt to codify, and thus
> clarify, the ways that both providers and consumers of these feedback
> mechanisms intend to use the feedback, describing some already common
> industry practices.
> 
> This document is the result of cooperative efforts within the
> Messaging Anti-Abuse Working Group, a trade organization separate
> from the IETF.  The original MAAWG document upon which this document
> is based was published in April, 2010.  This document does not
> represent the consensus of the IETF; rather it is being published as
> an Informational RFC to make it widely available to the Internet
> community and simplify reference to this material from IETF work.
> This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is
> published for informational purposes.
> 
> 
> INFORMATIONAL: This memo provides information for the Internet community.
> It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of
> this memo is unlimited.