Re: [arch-d] Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting & Conformance (dmarc) WG Virtual Meeting: 2020-06-11

"Murray S. Kucherawy" <> Wed, 13 May 2020 06:15 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D1123A0DE1 for <>; Tue, 12 May 2020 23:15:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id welamOWaZC1P for <>; Tue, 12 May 2020 23:15:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::a36]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 54DD03A0DE3 for <>; Tue, 12 May 2020 23:15:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id p5so3985940vke.1 for <>; Tue, 12 May 2020 23:15:10 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=TnR71OaAZkm3SK9ggeiJrSkMxFrqbYpIp9fdoGitVLo=; b=jcepLHAOQ9uhz/tIDN3l/skJjo0rY8h9EJU28pRD8Z1+XvF/+nKYVpWXOWUK6RbpHT Mf5ITi2kCn6nyIK0vtioPynBiKNMRPr3Cpx1UiuoQHnMWbUUX6wZcZSf1w3H8KPfkWUd DXggeRgBsXAZigbGWMIjaUltcjqKegNIUkrRanl6dCAWbny0k37GkTpHSw7GgU3e3Ki5 8MF0/tyPojU/FzanosYOVNJc5Uct1/Yvu7y9xc87u/SueGo2ket/jzRb+wDWs2m/5Cpf STBEq7Mmt/B7YWgpTbwt9VrHTtTgyd5RVAu3n/YgqzQlM8V/czG/qYmgRspdJYGrfWK1 h4xg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=TnR71OaAZkm3SK9ggeiJrSkMxFrqbYpIp9fdoGitVLo=; b=iFWeH9gJy8f+YixTWFArVNx2qJW3H/SgdNEn7PWgFy5sl9uuuXGHRq+2ONeMalncRq ozCMh4dCWfaU6nwrDMgjgnw31HGNG2Iv5hMnJYZUoc/IX+6DgiS3z1jvfffEXbzkTnE4 XcHlZXYdpS/k+YhnouhkGrBS+SY7QWYZuGQIs0RYVJaCyWuu2NyC0SYKXfE2i6Zzn2sW xDODWzn74zodYyrPUBa+Iut7EzblLGngRmPalfCQEvk3CV6WlhJic9v4Ey9gKCuUCz08 Bdp5HS1XWgQltoETgz1da6SCaxm5KSqiI7GIHVJDbSNDghgJSSP3JGlnn6U/70/EjYth z0RQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5311eMGyZ4rWynrbmjVYOtOAhNorzYhXbz1d6Ikj1hGizHRAx3bp vFCp7Fw8irjH5KzwSpk+3BKyLUURpHldZBx6S5E/1Y/w
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy745BJLPztpM2KlaOVr1WNXBCLwhuo8ljA/AsOz6DqJTwzy81XmjsmfGo6x0bQd4mnEmQwFtRyD9UTRXG+/oU=
X-Received: by 2002:a1f:bf0e:: with SMTP id p14mr9293012vkf.15.1589350509207; Tue, 12 May 2020 23:15:09 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <>
Date: Tue, 12 May 2020 23:14:58 -0700
Message-ID: <>
To: Stephen Farrell <>
Cc: S Moonesamy <>,,, Barry Leiba <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000086632e05a581809d"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [arch-d] Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting & Conformance (dmarc) WG Virtual Meeting: 2020-06-11
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: open discussion forum for long/wide-range architectural issues <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 May 2020 06:15:11 -0000

On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 7:27 PM Stephen Farrell <>

> Hiya,
> On 13/05/2020 03:20, S Moonesamy wrote:
> > The name (M3AAWG) was in the first email which I sent.
> Sorry, I must've missed that.
> Barry Leiba (cc'd) is our liaison to m3aawg IIRC. Maybe he
> can comment on whatever was said at the dmarc wg virtual
> interim.
> Cheers.
> S.
> PS: I'm involved a bit in m3aawg myself as I'm one of
> their senior technical advisors (well, supposedly senior
> in my case:-), but I wasn't at their most recent meeting
> back in Feb when meetings used happen so am not up to
> speed on dmarc goings-on in m3aawg.

Not speaking for Barry, but as the AD responsible for DMARC:

The meeting is being scheduled and operated as a typical WG interim
meeting, under IETF IPR rules and so forth, scheduled adjacent to a M3AAWG
session on the same topic.  The proximity is meant to encourage
participation in our forum by their members who are typically fairly shy
about doing so.

I don't believe there's been any formal liaison communication prior to
that, though as Stephen points out, Barry is the IETF's liaison to M3AAWG
and is, I imagine, aware of the two meetings and planning to participate in
both.  I will be doing the same.