Re: [dmarc-ietf] is DMARC informational?

Dave Crocker <dcrocker@gmail.com> Fri, 04 December 2020 23:04 UTC

Return-Path: <dcrocker@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 2D6CE3A10AD for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Dec 2020 15:04:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 c2UmuMwgOtLC for <dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Dec 2020 15:04:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pg1-x52b.google.com (mail-pg1-x52b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::52b]) (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 0E6C03A107D for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Fri, 4 Dec 2020 15:04:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pg1-x52b.google.com with SMTP id g18so4468700pgk.1 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Fri, 04 Dec 2020 15:04:30 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=t1/47gqpkyxWIcLyG/SEJ87RhVHQJTDO+tY5FjVkFZg=; b=VCSxTI/1j6f/BT8+ZrMzF2cNFvoOOprpJ8IX2NX0JnEdfdxKJO6eyS9ZWjCsfvd3fG lL6nCZrOmaKXyl9jLsiJRz9iYCkAJvQHNhpaY7AMsyugb4fFiJ++0hOA+fGKxttvsACl fdgeNFWvVerXoliBfD6zQBLIQw71UByqh9sxPJ1vFfmu06YWdHe9pTbXrTWloR8VVzwd 1Y32UrHPqI3eIT6z/Ncdt3N7J7TY+ew8gXmPfofl9P89W2I8SxshCUpkjeznnLpKRJDy WspG/ESZcNDtQSNNzSKDoUEoyq6M1zHBE1Zy2ubiGmGS4y6YbZ3kk46G8Xw4FiyZ8MiG ZczQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=t1/47gqpkyxWIcLyG/SEJ87RhVHQJTDO+tY5FjVkFZg=; b=JvTYPvl8DCqIPxthLIgRN/SW59taClJMUlZ2VSihBdGNQDtb0R53Ru74xSn4PxT2mP ipBjjlkRZzPErIh6H2xzPphGNUs6wkaRU96VaQiL0jsUqhd39U6mShDeKgYNSPnE4Nv0 DZg17CfsKAAaF2b4PJEx7J/2jftuGxn3uMqAaLvUocI4ICNtRIIHlZYWCdzcPiUTnUNC Gb00A89ozo/9kTwrxALy+GEwvy4eO3Fub2LZHa5zGdydhqvkaLfTnrVgwqCwoyN9v2Nz cb7k9n0hnMBydV4k54LuKLucGg9riTKTO8WPSE4AvCRi51ouyFvJ4FeJcGk2rIeSHxbn c/gg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531Jyz31uULFL4ujRMH/rxv64AAed5HOPorhzW76iBFOaZqpJfh6 Y6uzYwPc/xDPGtikPStAW56MP03yGM4=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwDBTXb/CAG4FDfWqniS8Rgx6J4+KBCN0WucMvSFQtwCcOgmoKic2BDutrFWRR3G4CvocR8lg==
X-Received: by 2002:a65:42c7:: with SMTP id l7mr9367937pgp.438.1607123069422; Fri, 04 Dec 2020 15:04:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.0.109] (c-24-130-62-181.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [24.130.62.181]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p15sm2835511pgi.40.2020.12.04.15.04.28 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 04 Dec 2020 15:04:28 -0800 (PST)
To: Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com>, Brandon Long <blong@google.com>
Cc: "dmarc@ietf.org" <dmarc@ietf.org>
References: <134860ee-5fbf-2fb3-a5b3-4be68806ab22@mtcc.com> <CABa8R6veBqY1fUuoy3Qm=vfrV51_5YyoS0P4SLSbKJP_Qrcn-A@mail.gmail.com> <7224575d-685f-5020-073e-c1880acecc88@mtcc.com> <7e459496-61f8-ddcd-713c-3b6be448090c@gmail.com> <2cecceac-1add-44ec-6e16-e157fee293fe@mtcc.com> <5a577765-4a0d-e1bf-5321-dfeff19d107e@gmail.com> <40d7e78e-7026-c65c-383c-df4e3c537de3@mtcc.com> <6fae9ca6-d8ea-1d62-4156-249191029cc3@gmail.com> <80f9963e-20bf-cdfe-cf3b-cda7b2ed08ab@mtcc.com>
From: Dave Crocker <dcrocker@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <d9701f1d-1b5f-66c7-dfb9-55e2cc0542a2@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2020 15:04:27 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <80f9963e-20bf-cdfe-cf3b-cda7b2ed08ab@mtcc.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/BKSeiAuCwP3Gy0pyKNKyVdc0840>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] is DMARC informational?
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, 04 Dec 2020 23:04:39 -0000

On 12/4/2020 3:01 PM, Michael Thomas wrote:
> is responsive to my question in what way?

You think "the working group created a new document" is not responsive?

d/

-- 
Dave Crocker
dcrocker@gmail.com
408.329.0791

Volunteer, Silicon Valley Chapter
American Red Cross
dave.crocker2@redcross.org