IETF Logo Mail Archive

[dmarc-ietf] Second WGLC for draft-ietf-dmarc-psd

Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com> Fri, 13 November 2020 18:42 UTC

Return-Path: <tjw.ietf@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 D07A93A102A; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 10:42:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.087
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.087 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, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] 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 ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CTpeqjjzFe0J; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 10:42:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ot1-x330.google.com (mail-ot1-x330.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::330]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8980B3A1026; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 10:42:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ot1-x330.google.com with SMTP id 79so9808494otc.7; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 10:42:05 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=8fQQOvyD8vgAyfFDRs5FL7VfHkAqPypCIMUaTUHjGFI=; b=mfZF82r7kzdIE2qExoS3B7bQHqbjOdAU2U7s7nhc5lhjDnVcoxOxaFOaqzX9CupG28 JKckC98Rp55P5joruZg3z7NQ5dyWW9f8yuM3f+WHkZZmnC4qILUxcyZ8z0aaK2UMUKxH YVrIJuoLwFMM8XDIxrSvihNcHUoRrLCAuRlNTfllFsddt3DpmBuvJvSI6gX81c+z7ZZ/ MmNlCkQKiIRoeHcudX9m7SHc7+jvmcNVDEYB+yFL9HYPVeRZ+qZ2tWNEb59aPSC0bz5O SxJ01S8MAtPyluNJnS5ZYxIUTb0CcJ/ef2YHN3+2V5VthY3g3sZZzTHY+ntp7tSH7Uhn WzmQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=8fQQOvyD8vgAyfFDRs5FL7VfHkAqPypCIMUaTUHjGFI=; b=t1O4SRO1N3NfOOPdkB9yPKd6FA6TOrPNHlXPWajNT0Hx/MyU3BmcElIhfPmEHp/x60 LC07nFvucsmOYzV9OWpO+NCnLj0V8USve5Y8fqcFxrKIRu80OGTQIdMMjO1BWAhEGR1t 3Nvz3ISMc5CZg0Tt4anT1zT0Ncuzdrb92AV+NxC8tS3A+nUNtPckb2zIpEW1KfFCiJNL V2GhqW0gXAkCbcVxUYR9NTyEEDv+E3TmE51zOwXL5k9tpNoSVXUSnfyIuRKajBc5ldL5 ssmilE9/4scnOmQa/d93unhMhCsn70orsjtE29dRq8ZHDQCnJU2xi/+AUs/wT4rsmEUY xfyg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530V6bEtHzZ7StohUngt0yhwYFPVuqf+O0eBmlI+POFxHtGNhLc3 BhDUneZyoaGhxHtrsLP7e5FcvGRl69btgCxgwxuPeGywdP0=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwoZqYbvg2940HlBAG6/iHHnTfSgJg1A0rJd9mhBXNNcWx4S4jcQzKGnNoYKkvgVdZ2UwqQCJ66b0gBwCNLk7s=
X-Received: by 2002:a9d:7392:: with SMTP id j18mr2549331otk.288.1605292924542; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 10:42:04 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 13:41:53 -0500
Message-ID: <CADyWQ+HWEK=wm5WLTcgiB0JBY0GubntOp3Qhzfr68YB2__RRNg@mail.gmail.com>
To: IETF DMARC WG <dmarc@ietf.org>
Cc: dmarc-chairs@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000008722b405b40162e3"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/8lK6Xx1Lr4dqMDK--wCwCsxjKtg>
Subject: [dmarc-ietf] Second WGLC for draft-ietf-dmarc-psd
X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" <dmarc.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dmarc>, <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dmarc/>
List-Post: <mailto:dmarc@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc>, <mailto:dmarc-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 18:42:07 -0000

All

During the IESG reviews of draft-ietf-dmarc-psd, there were several issues
raised with some of the document.   Most of them are editorial but the one
big item was the description of the Experiment.   The chairs sat down and
broke out the experiment section into three separate experiments, and
included language on how to capture the data to confirm how the experiment
worked.

It's enough of a change that we wanted to do a second working group last
call to make sure the working group agrees with our changes. The diff of
the current version with the previous version is here:

https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=draft-ietf-dmarc-psd-08&url2=draft-ietf-dmarc-psd-09

This starts a *one* week second working group last call for
draft-ietf-dmarc-psd

Please review the changes and offer up comments to the working group.


This working group last call 20 November 2020

Thanks,

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email