Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin of a bunch of SMALL community lists

"Andrew G. Malis" <> Sun, 13 April 2014 14:26 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DA131A0165 for <>; Sun, 13 Apr 2014 07:26:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dykEMt1nOaZ8 for <>; Sun, 13 Apr 2014 07:26:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c00::232]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6DE61A014B for <>; Sun, 13 Apr 2014 07:26:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id ih12so7052489qab.37 for <>; Sun, 13 Apr 2014 07:26:42 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=e2XMY63o223lViLIktjHVzE7h2UKIIxXDPZsd7H5dO0=; b=qjETTyTC8Ge+HN94X9xaWdUVdP5ThrNB9Eh53MfrlTHEUjnWhvGek748hlnsiPJieO pTHmEVww/mp1bVblWFHQFlTe7bWjkOMDlG5d8s7EFfK1rZiFpVBA+6CKPbsDJs3P1HEb M75NRRRtI01DSg2KyeWsU3+/g2QA+bdSI5OZFBnbm4SiEwn9e/ZNvDhlNBKuAUWRil9M UcUWESyejtBFhOeUEo9tdqdfdtS597gjkU8gSS7JStpvYXGj+PbkwlaN3KlJJId8k6PJ 76p6Rkjn3OY5E8pjGHAjul0BeVPk7gMqopXBe/AtKCBxi+fdNR5NldOaXwxeGdXh+5vk emog==
X-Received: by with SMTP id h8mr41478404qge.2.1397399202515; Sun, 13 Apr 2014 07:26:42 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by with HTTP; Sun, 13 Apr 2014 07:26:22 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <>
From: "Andrew G. Malis" <>
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2014 10:26:22 -0400
Message-ID: <>
Subject: Re: DMARC from the perspective of the listadmin of a bunch of SMALL community lists
To: Dave Crocker <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c15cc4134ffc04f6ed5b9c
Cc: IETF Discussion <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2014 14:26:46 -0000


I couldn't help seeing in your email:

The DMARC specification is not 'an IETF document'.  The current plan is to
> publish it as an RFC, through the 'Independent' stream, which also is /not/
> an IETF activity.

when compared to the following at (on the front page):

"DMARC policies are published in the public Domain Name System (DNS), and
available to everyone. It is the goal of to submit the draft
specification to the IETF so that it may begin the process of becoming an
official Internet Standard RFC - available to everyone for reference,
implementation, and improvement."

The statement on really does look like a misrepresentation.