[dmarc-ietf] Adam Roach's Yes on draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol-21: (with COMMENT)

Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> Wed, 21 November 2018 04:07 UTC

Return-Path: <adam@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: dmarc@ietf.org
Delivered-To: dmarc@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B509130F2D; Tue, 20 Nov 2018 20:07:04 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol@ietf.org, Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>, dmarc-chairs@ietf.org, tjw.ietf@gmail.com, dmarc@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.89.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <154277322456.29950.9124294245241485227.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2018 20:07:04 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/lsJxAAMqtR9J7Vr668WyNxgI--8>
Subject: [dmarc-ietf] Adam Roach's Yes on draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol-21: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: dmarc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Wed, 21 Nov 2018 04:07:09 -0000

Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-dmarc-arc-protocol-21: Yes

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:


Thanks to everyone for the work that went into this document. I'm excited by
this experiment, and hope it eventually grows into something we can put on the
standards track.


id-nits reports:

  ** There are 3 instances of too long lines in the document, the longest one
     being 15 characters in excess of 72.



>       remote-ip[1]=</comment>

Please consider using an IPv6 address here. See

In any case, please use an address from the ranges reserved by either RFC 5737
or (preferably) RFC 3849.


Appendix B:

> Received: from example.org (example.org [])
> Received: from segv.d1.example (segv.d1.example [])
> Received: from [] (w-x-y-z.dsl.static.isp.com [w.x.y.z])
>     []) by clochette.example.org with ESMTP id

The two comments I made on §7.2 apply to these four IP addresses as well.