Greetings all, Thank you for your quick reply Alessandro! Apologies, as we note the authors opted in to AUTH48 in GitHub. Please pause your responses momentarily while we get your repo set up. We will send a new AUTH48 notification with the process instructions shortly.
Thank you, Sandy Ginoza RFC Production Center > On May 14, 2026, at 4:20 AM, Alessandro Vesely <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > a quick reply, to be reviewed by coauthor and other participants. > > On Thu 14/May/2026 02:19:33 +0200 RFC Errata System wrote: >> While reviewing this document during AUTH48, please resolve (as necessary) >> the following questions, which are also in the source file. >> 1) <!-- [rfced] Please insert any keywords (beyond those that appear in >> the title) for use on https://www.rfc-editor.org/search. --> > > > I'd set: > > <keyword>DMARC</keyword> > <keyword>DKIM</keyword> > <keyword>SPF</keyword> > <keyword>feedback</keyword> > <keyword>Email Authentication</keyword> > <keyword>Failure report</keyword> > > >> 2) <!--[rfced] To improve the readability of this sentence, may we update >> the punctuation as follows? >> Original: >> A Mail Receiver generating DMARC failure reports MAY issue failure reports >> specific to the failed authentication mechanism instead of, or in >> addition to, DMARC failure reports, based on its own policy, the >> failure in question, and the content of the "fo" tag in the retrieved >> DMARC Policy Record. >> Perhaps: >> A Mail Receiver generating DMARC failure reports MAY issue failure reports >> specific to the failed authentication mechanism instead of (or in >> addition to) DMARC failure reports that are based on the Receiver's own >> policy, the >> failure in question, and the content of the "fo" tag in the retrieved >> DMARC Policy Record. >> --> > > > This change alters the meaning of the sentence. Perhaps it can be better > clarified by splitting it. > > A Mail Receiver that generates DMARC failure reports MAY choose to issue > failure reports of the type specific to the authentication mechanism that > failed instead of, or in addition to, the DMARC failure report type > described here. The Receiver SHALL determine which failure report types, > if any, to transmit based on its own policy, the failure in question, and > the content of the "fo" tag in the retrieved DMARC Policy Record. > > >> 3) <!--[rfced] This line within the ABNF in Section 4 exceeds the >> 72-character >> limit by 3 characters. Please let us know how it can be modified. >> Original: >> dmarc-method *( [CFWS] "," [CFWS] dmarc-method ) ) >> --> > > > Perhaps: > > <sourcecode type="abnf"><![CDATA[ > id-align = "Identity-Alignment:" [CFWS] > ( "none" / > dmarc-method > *( [CFWS] "," [CFWS] dmarc-method ) ) > [CFWS] > > dmarc-method = ( "dkim" / "spf" ) > ; each may appear at most once in an id-align]]></sourcecode> > > >> 4) <!-- [rfced] FYI - We have added expansions for the following >> abbreviations >> per Section 3.6 of RFC 7322 ("RFC Style Guide"). Please review each >> expansion in the document carefully to ensure correctness. >> comments and/or folding white space (CFWS) >> DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) >> Sender Policy Framework (SPF) >> --> > > > That's fine. Could also expand: > > Domain-Based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Conformance (DMARC) > Uniform resource identifier (URI) > Abuse Reporting Format (ARF) > Personally Identifiable Information (PII) > non-public information (NPI) > > >> 5) <!-- [rfced] Please review the "Inclusive Language" portion of the online >> Style Guide <https://www.rfc-editor.org/styleguide/part2/#inclusive_language> >> and let us know if any changes are needed. Updates of this nature typically >> result in more precise language, which is helpful for readers. >> Note that our script did not flag any words in particular, but this should >> still be reviewed as a best practice. >> --> > > > I found none of the NIST words. (Luckily we can still say "white space"...) > > I attach an edited XML file with the above changes (except expansions). > > > Best > Ale > -- > > > > > <rfc9991-edited.xml> -- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
