Subject: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-rfc7601bis-03.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2018 11:02:34 -0700

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting & Conformance WG of the IETF.

        Title           : Message Header Field for Indicating Message Authentication Status
        Author          : Murray S. Kucherawy
	Filename        : draft-ietf-dmarc-rfc7601bis-03.txt
	Pages           : 48
	Date            : 2018-08-22

Abstract:
   This document specifies a message header field called Authentication-
   Results for use with electronic mail messages to indicate the results
   of message authentication efforts.  Any receiver-side software, such
   as mail filters or Mail User Agents (MUAs), can use this header field
   to relay that information in a convenient and meaningful way to users
   or to make sorting and filtering decisions.

The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dmarc-rfc7601bis/

There are also htmlized versions available at:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dmarc-rfc7601bis-03
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-dmarc-rfc7601bis-03

A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-dmarc-rfc7601bis-03

Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

---

From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2018 23:39:45 +0000

>    or to make sorting and filtering decisions.

This is the WGLC result.  Tim sent me privately a large number of edits
which I cherry picked for things that were broken or obviously wrong and
punted on stuff that seemed less than that.  Tim, feel free to argue harder
for anything I passed over for inclusion.

Apart from that, I think this is good to go; everything else that appeared
to meet consensus was included.

-MSK

---

From: Tim Draegen <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2018 10:24:26 +0300

> On Aug 23, 2018, at 2:39 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> This is the WGLC result.  Tim sent me privately a large number of edits which I cherry picked for things that were broken or obviously wrong and punted on stuff that seemed less than that.  Tim, feel free to argue harder for anything I passed over for inclusion.
> 
> Apart from that, I think this is good to go; everything else that appeared to meet consensus was included.

Righto! Thank you Murray for the attention to detail.

I’ll will not be arguing for additional changes. Onward with shepherding..

=- Tim