IETF Logo Mail Archive

[dmarc-ietf] Re: Evaluating consensus on the idea of making ARC "Historic"

Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it> Sun, 19 July 2026 16:34 UTC

Return-Path: <vesely@tana.it>
X-Original-To: dmarc@mail2.ietf.org
Delivered-To: dmarc@mail2.ietf.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF75E119B592A for <dmarc@mail2.ietf.org>; Sun, 19 Jul 2026 09:34:38 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1784478878; bh=53NrkrPWXxs9J8VQari/7Ur6u8KeOMpsC5LJT6nmA8A=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=qUsFgm8NNJHJQcI3w2y9BLn3F0GLqGGwd3PI+7FEdzHzbZHjPBAdt1u4eLQV9ma9A 2JX0c55W5bcPvOvbNe41zbungYV9cY0KGn8c3IBdd7iibkv1kp6t4fcWpCCvetQg0A 9oBm4Tccb1opb2XeFYLKpafdvjHy8PeVshEFnagM=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org
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, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: mail2.ietf.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1152-bit key) header.d=tana.it
Received: from mail2.ietf.org ([166.84.6.31]) by localhost (mail2.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iQW4eCqhRL-o for <dmarc@mail2.ietf.org>; Sun, 19 Jul 2026 09:34:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wmail.tana.it (wmail.tana.it [94.198.96.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 11658119B5925 for <dmarc@ietf.org>; Sun, 19 Jul 2026 09:34:36 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tana.it; s=delta; t=1784478874; bh=ZeUdiXN3rpYn6c93uL7d9i7844ZhT5OErGKR7T4cbWs=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=C3KGKqSLKajG0nj9w3qxvNcrJvkXmEGhuS85eU+fAqV+IMKXCvlmuBZ1k8a1tvFi4 o+Qgey0L+f4CwqujbvYKCBFR/sqsTc0pxQHbWJtF52pbDAPRX8KGiGVpDSlkDdx9AS iSAzjituy3JF1p8nRR+FkC62jDzNnzPvxBE6tOeOeQisW/GzMFMZNwnJjtBc6
Original-Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Re: Evaluating consensus on the idea of making ARC "Historic"
Author: Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it>
Received: from [172.25.197.87] (pcale.tana [::ffff:172.25.197.87]) (AUTH: CRAM-MD5 uXDGrn@SYT0/k, TLS: TLS1.3,128bits,ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) by wmail.tana.it with ESMTPSA id 00000000005DC028.000000006A5CFC9A.0000267B; Sun, 19 Jul 2026 18:34:34 +0200
Message-ID: <8662a47a-48da-4bb2-b783-ca2f4350a96b@tana.it>
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2026 18:33:47 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
To: Dotzero <dotzero@gmail.com>, DMARC Working Group <dmarc@ietf.org>
References: <CALaySJJx_Q7ANbhooNSHY7XawW51Lt42hM771O6Kr-pKLrt5=g@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ4XoYc0DKpuT1ssSJDfPuGkPKNv=0Ex13mg68RhZ3rvZeeMCA@mail.gmail.com>
Authentication-Results: tana.it; auth=pass (details omitted)
From: Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it>
Content-Language: en-US, it-IT
In-Reply-To: <CAJ4XoYc0DKpuT1ssSJDfPuGkPKNv=0Ex13mg68RhZ3rvZeeMCA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID-Hash: 3I2FYW73AZLZIOQ6K4LJ7SZBUWXSA2WD
X-Message-ID-Hash: 3I2FYW73AZLZIOQ6K4LJ7SZBUWXSA2WD
X-MailFrom: vesely@tana.it
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
CC: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@gmail.com>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [dmarc-ietf] Re: Evaluating consensus on the idea of making ARC "Historic"
List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance (DMARC)" <dmarc.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/Z_J6WBbu4mlAKo44ffbb4THeFqQ>
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>

On Sat 18/Jul/2026 00:14:48 +0200 dotzero@gmail.com wrote:
> 1) Shut the group down and leave ARC status as-is. Let the supporters of ARC 
> continue their experiment and come back at a later point with an updated 
> document and data.
> 2) Shut the group down and leave ARC status as-is until DKIM2 has time in the 
> wild and it is shown that it's functionality does in fact replace ARC. That 
> would be a more appropriate time to consider marking ARC historic.


3) Edit the I-D reporting the state of the experiment and documenting the 
reasons why ARC couldn't solve the mailing list problem.


Best
Ale
--

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status