Re: [dmarc-ietf] Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-dmarc-psd

Seth Blank <> Wed, 26 June 2019 21:21 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FB071202B4 for <>; Wed, 26 Jun 2019 14:21:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.988
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.988 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id J1Nzy2sG0BJz for <>; Wed, 26 Jun 2019 14:21:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::432]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C927B120379 for <>; Wed, 26 Jun 2019 14:21:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id n9so11001wru.0 for <>; Wed, 26 Jun 2019 14:21:27 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=google2048; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=dmeUcjbhOr88PcFb/G96C/Wzfa21eHXOU3a5KyMLKzk=; b=XgkjU42P0SnRE6+Uto+6ZmGXyt7SZtVOjuuppKO3EUx+nZpm1FcBbF+DRH8hRik22z Bjj94tcue/x9HQYdyz+0RJzIi3LymfYgHLx/EvDkTX6o+fTdvF8Ik0zDnR8MMKqSheZJ oKKOBa0D1SJ5uI3dyNcdoAeQ2yhuC4Y+G3hPO146E4N/M1zIrTjemDGzhwm8pPWFsw9f 99Somso485dIn5GILu7uzotHN1oGn+nvThhs3r5ZHZ+tcRSFUoeFB6bbtZkewDXnjUmD tbFFDrKzgae7ukWr+2pUwD0iSj7w02Rt/Kj4SeQb66qYASfSWIYGGlF8niEhhAXMGwMZ K1Gg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=dmeUcjbhOr88PcFb/G96C/Wzfa21eHXOU3a5KyMLKzk=; b=nGKc6WNRzICkeFgE4UtufnH4OLmvoXqozH1YxDXJ0Qu7tTbhTg9DQ2yBKlFq9bOp7s Yz9Ef5mW341zhgBdb4F5pSIEefPlBHCg46Hxd1yQu48IW60RcFcsnL9T3Bsfj7RzGKrp ISzN9yMSk6eHjr4YJdWjpkpDj32ngikgzuvhcBTnefukm3upVuk1mc4GN+KDD/q6HrMs Bvr4uacbn//YA1N61PzgjRyEZtmgHMLu3K756XRk15girGt/fZJ8rQqwPf8crV8YBd12 vWySDe9fOenJDfZ/owbEShFSYl3DlIDQhvt6GujLeZgP+iuIT0x3pYGTKTHUX6jE+Yqn /5pw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVKBidlTalRrPQ47tK7HspqSjUIFSpYYYaWOWBMzigsbtj5QFSK 2NUKHpZrgsM4xMOX+yyvwcvLJAZZY0De3b6s6tvQGsdrHQk=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxEoO+hYfGGXjqpFo27/bG7jBE7eLphg9o8yatE3uMApWBuPMKM5OT+O38P7dl4mGGrTpWLb4sayLqKg+D5g88=
X-Received: by 2002:adf:cf0a:: with SMTP id o10mr5174150wrj.37.1561584085764; Wed, 26 Jun 2019 14:21:25 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Seth Blank <>
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2019 14:21:14 -0700
Message-ID: <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000b82045058c40a00b"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-dmarc-psd
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Compliance \(DMARC\)" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2019 21:21:32 -0000

As Secretary, there are three items that have not yet reached consensus
that must be resolved during WGLC:

1. What further context is needed in the introduction
2. If explicit call outs to ICANN/limited operator capacity to implement
are needed
3. If an np= tag is needed to allow PSD functioning for only NXDOMAINs


On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 2:08 PM Murray S. Kucherawy <>;

> This message begins Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-dmarc-psd,
> which is currently at version 04.  An 05 may appear shortly with some text
> changes that were previously discussed on the list; these do not include
> any technical changes (I believe) so the author is free to update with only
> those changes as planned.
> Please review the document and submit your feedback by Wednesday, July
> 17th.  We would ideally like to have enough responses to support our claim
> to the IESG that the document clearly has working group consensus.
> Note that we will be in pre-meeting draft embargo at that time so a new
> version dealing with any feeback cannot appear until IETF 105 begins on the
> 22nd.
> I'm planning to do my own review as the document shepherd with an eye
> toward consumption by readers with only a passing familiarity with DMARC.
> If anyone wants to join me in looking at it through that lens, you'd be
> welcome.
> -MSK, co-chairin'
> _______________________________________________
> dmarc mailing list


*Seth Blank* | Director, Industry Initiatives
*p:* 415.273.8818

This email and all data transmitted with it contains confidential

and/or proprietary information intended solely for the use of

individual(s) authorized to receive it. If you are not an intended

and authorized recipient you are hereby notified of any use,

disclosure, copying or distribution of the information included in

this transmission is prohibited and may be unlawful. Please

immediately notify the sender by replying to this email and then

delete it from your system.