Return-Path: <superuser@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63D45C151099
	for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Nov 2024 10:47:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.106
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.106 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001,
	RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001,
	SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01]
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
	header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194])
	by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id dxLc6hApHlS2 for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>;
	Wed, 20 Nov 2024 10:47:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ej1-x632.google.com (mail-ej1-x632.google.com
 [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::632])
	(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits)
	 key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256)
	(No client certificate requested)
	by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D3353C1D52F4
	for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Nov 2024 10:47:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ej1-x632.google.com with SMTP id
 a640c23a62f3a-aa20c733e92so13364766b.0
        for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Nov 2024 10:47:23 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1732128441; x=1732733241; darn=ietf.org;
        h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject
         :date:message-id:reply-to;
        bh=JZ5eyLXOfto0Z+kuNcsq+vx3R0PTtST+2/dM2kVZjw8=;
        b=PrJ5BZk3Ntpmx+5hJb/8g5HDUu8GOFRMtsPnilqvUE80iQMWKoUQI1sxcV5Dx/1T3P
         Z0Dfy3oVhOCgmNqeyKDzORmRryyi/wZat2Lpj2GJb9YPkunltfN4y90SX/k59CNxljKm
         krpfGLFVK6C49y/o86cZHXirwSd3C6aHc82ojdu0m7kv9odRztVTYTV0ugd2RYDcsahM
         CSixrJVbnqCmQDbRShvZjP+d8xs2OjfcgwVkQ3s9MgzlYcOIUD5UAbfCRobGHpAwPOhz
         e6hKPUXPIvFsdRcTo67gIEVrpc/mrdVt3DetKSjA82805KN2Ej7ezyBOWXFOhMzSSq4I
         T+9w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1732128441; x=1732733241;
        h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:mime-version:x-gm-message-state
         :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
        bh=JZ5eyLXOfto0Z+kuNcsq+vx3R0PTtST+2/dM2kVZjw8=;
        b=MUyablMzZudUYqWMdJtNMPue4pM6L9yXl7xNrJ4ak1sK5hPPCyYMFSHRKblhcc+4bQ
         0L8EicrR9AAJeDyA86vMi2AxxrRVQhvHqlYJYPVSQi1F1HagqLhOJPBRbcQ3iBENqOQG
         HEHB2HrCkGMmFEaAT0f3ZvDY/Mgvix75SRpSN8oKV5rLS0n0f2YdeqXQM5/VI0enGdlu
         wJjD5kzMcrkEHm8XhRHvTtFxD88X+lhFSZoq5tBO/Mbvn3KjkAItj0vCAqSQLVlX0tP0
         4FK7je6WK07oDHdzlrnPGwTgo3jFJHip3QShPH0MIyOzQtlBrmYSwUfMRcf4Zs0DxYBx
         CnXg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxJVMqEkpab0jGJpRAxbiZzzKCYQLjP46AvQpl422BTn7R/rrn5
	0GysLS6otu0d2Y2zVWmuMWXVKvVPmi7R0MVto3N4AH4ukZfpxeROzHqR6lEb5NPFDRLotZqts/j
	BHRvXTh0Tiw4URSTKAPvrola8nHC25A==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: 
 AGHT+IGrShU9Fbq7YJL8uQH7OMLzK4veKw6mQXwvw0S0SFdi+Wom6PDqtkLg0LiNS7x+MVSB78ZBCnyuH47Z8X+UIYs=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:2dac:b0:a9e:65a8:b1fd with SMTP id
 a640c23a62f3a-aa4dd551c1fmr358756666b.22.1732128441079; Wed, 20 Nov 2024
 10:47:21 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2024 10:47:09 -0800
Message-ID: 
 <CAL0qLwbbJpKdKifHCbk1jr3ASzWcK=-jfpBnSrxLfezF-AAggw@mail.gmail.com>
To: IETF DMARC WG <dmarc@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000006f9cec06275c9411"
Message-ID-Hash: B3TSMAO3IKJRKXL65LF6WHGPI77OXMJJ
X-Message-ID-Hash: B3TSMAO3IKJRKXL65LF6WHGPI77OXMJJ
X-MailFrom: superuser@gmail.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency;
 loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-dmarc.ietf.org-0;
 nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size;
 news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: =?utf-8?q?=5Bdmarc-ietf=5D_Requesting_Last_Call_for_DMARCbis?=
List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting,
 and Compliance (DMARC)" <dmarc.ietf.org>
Archived-At: 
 <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/2h9uCq6qZzEegyxf_iB56CjzMtk>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dmarc>
List-Help: <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:dmarc-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dmarc@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:dmarc-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:dmarc-leave@ietf.org>

--0000000000006f9cec06275c9411
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

I am about to request IETF-wide Last Call for DMARCbis.  For those
unfamiliar, this is the next formal step in document development.
Basically:

* WG document
* WG last call
* Publication request
* AD Evaluation <= YOU ARE HERE
* IETF Last Call
* IESG Evaluation
* RFC Editor
* publication

My read and that of the chairs is that the issues raised during the current
phase have been discussed and resolved by consensus, and we're ready to
proceed on that basis.  As I mentioned earlier, the next phase will likely
produce additional feedback from a wider audience which the WG will also
have to deal with before it goes to the IESG.

Last Call will take two weeks once it starts.  During that time, please
don't just wait for that to end; that's two weeks you can spend organizing
yourselves around and developing whatever other document(s) you would like
to see completed before the March deadline.  You should do this in parallel
with dealing with any feedback that comes in from the Last Call.

Away we go.

-MSK, ART AD

--0000000000006f9cec06275c9411
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">I am about to request IETF-wide Last Call for DMARCbis.=C2=
=A0 For those unfamiliar, this is the next formal step in document developm=
ent.=C2=A0 Basically:<br><br>* WG document<br>* WG last call<br>* Publicati=
on request<br>* AD Evaluation &lt;=3D YOU ARE HERE<br>* IETF Last Call<br>*=
 IESG Evaluation<br>* RFC Editor<br>* publication<br><br>My read and that o=
f the chairs is that the issues raised during the current phase have been d=
iscussed and resolved by consensus, and we&#39;re ready to proceed on that =
basis.=C2=A0 As I mentioned earlier, the=C2=A0next phase will likely produc=
e additional feedback from a wider audience which the WG will also have to =
deal with before it goes to the IESG.<br><br>Last Call will take two weeks =
once it starts.=C2=A0 During that time, please don&#39;t just wait for that=
 to end; that&#39;s two weeks you can spend organizing yourselves around an=
d developing whatever other document(s) you would like to see completed bef=
ore the March deadline.=C2=A0 You should do this in parallel with dealing w=
ith any feedback=C2=A0that comes in from the Last Call.<div><br></div><div>=
Away we go.</div><div><br></div><div>-MSK, ART AD</div></div>

--0000000000006f9cec06275c9411--

