Hi Alanna, These changes are complete:
https://www.iana.org/assignments/email-auth Thanks, Sabrina On Mon May 18 17:07:24 2026, [email protected] wrote: > IANA, > > Please update the “Email Authentication Methods” registry > <https://www.iana.org/assignments/email-auth/email-auth.xhtml#email- > auth-methods> as follows. > > Old: > Method: dmarc > Value: The domain portion of the [RFC-ietf-emailcore-rfc5322bis- > 12].From header field > > Method: dmarc > Value: The evaluated DMARC policy applied/to be applied after policy > options have been processed. Must be "none", "quarantine", or > "reject". > > New: > Method: dmarc > Value: The domain portion of the RFC5322.From header field > > Method: dmarc > Value: The evaluated DMARC policy applied / to be applied after policy > options have been processed. Must be "none", "quarantine", or > "reject". > > The diff file is here: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9989-diff.html > > Best regards, > Alanna Paloma > RFC Production Center > > > On May 18, 2026, at 10:02 AM, Alanna Paloma <[email protected] > > editor.org> wrote: > > > > Hi John and Todd, > > > > Thank you both for the quick replies. We will leave "RFC5322.From” as > > is. > > > > We will now ask IANA to update their registry accordingly. After the > > IANA updates are complete, we will move forward with the publication > > process. > > > > Best regards, > > Alanna Paloma > > RFC Production Center > > > >> On May 18, 2026, at 9:53 AM, Todd Herr <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> I concur. Leave it as it is. > >> > >> > >> Todd > >> > >> > >> On Mon, May 18, 2026 at 12:52 John R Levine <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> On Mon, 18 May 2026, Alanna Paloma wrote: > >> > >>> Hi Todd and John, > >>> > >>> Thank you for your replies. We’ve fixed the nits pointed out by > >>> John and noted his approval on the AUTH48 status page: > >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9989 > >>> > >>> We have one additional question regarding "RFC5322.From”. > >> > >> The description of the From header in 5322bis is unchanged from 5322 > >> (I > >> just checked) and I expect that people reading this document will be > >> familar with RFC5322.From. So I'd prefer to leave it as is and not > >> wait. > >> > >> Todd? > >> > >> R's, > >> John > >> > >>> > >>> The current value for dmarc in the "Email Authentication Methods" > >>> registry <https://www.iana.org/assignments/email-auth/email- > >>> auth.xhtml#email-auth-methods> cites 5322bis, while this document > >>> uses "RFC5322.From” throughout. > >>> > >>> IANA registry: > >>> The domain portion of the [RFC-ietf-emailcore-rfc5322bis-12].From > >>> header field > >>> > >>> Currently in document: > >>> The domain portion of the RFC5322.From header field > >>> > >>> Is RFC 5322 or 5322bis preferred? If 5322bis is preferred, this > >>> document will be paused and moved with Cluster C540. > >>> > >>> —Files — > >>> > >>> XML file: > >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9989.xml > >>> > >>> Output files: > >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9989.txt > >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9989.html > >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9989.pdf > >>> > >>> Diffs: > >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9989-diff.html (comprehensive > >>> diff) > >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9989-rfcdiff.html (side by > >>> side) > >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9989-lastdiff.html (last > >>> version to this one) > >>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9989-lastrfcdiff.html > >>> (rfcdiff between last version and this) > >>> > >>>> On May 15, 2026, at 11:49 AM, Todd Herr <[email protected]> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> For the official record, I concur with John's two minor items > >>>> here. > >>>> > >>>> On Fri, May 15, 2026 at 2:49 PM John R. Levine <[email protected]> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> I went through and found two minor items. I checked with Todd who > >>>> agrees > >>>> with them. Other than that, ready to go. > >>>> > >>>> In 3.2.17, "PSD's policy" should instead be "PSO's policy". > >>>> > >>>> In B.2.2, the reference to RFC6591 reports should be to RFC9991 > >>>> reports. > >>>> > >>>> I made a pull request if you want to use it. > >>>> > >>>> Regards, > >>>> John Levine, [email protected], Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet > >>>> for Dummies", > >>>> Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. > >>>> https://jl.ly > >>>> > >>>> On Wed, 13 May 2026, Alanna Paloma wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Hello Todd and John, > >>>>> > >>>>> We have merged the updates. > >>>>> > >>>>> Additionally, we have further updated the ABNF in Section 4.8, as > >>>>> the previously suggested update was 1 character over the 72- > >>>>> character limit. > >>>>> > >>>>> Current: > >>>>> dmarc-urilist = (dmarc-uri / obs-dmarc-uri) > >>>>> *(*WSP "," *WSP (dmarc-uri / obs-dmarc- > >>>>> uri)) > >>>>> > >>>>> Please review the XML file and its TXT, HTML, and PDF outputs, > >>>>> and let us know if any changes are required or if you approve the > >>>>> RFC for publication. We consider this your final assent that the > >>>>> document is ready for publication. To request changes or approve > >>>>> your RFC for publication, please reply to this email. Please use > >>>>> ‘REPLY ALL’, as all the parties CCed on this message need to see > >>>>> your approval. > >>>>> > >>>>> XML file: > >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9989.xml > >>>>> > >>>>> Output files: > >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9989.txt > >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9989.html > >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9989.pdf > >>>>> > >>>>> Comprehensive diff file of the text: > >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9989-diff.html > >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9989-rfcdiff.html (side by > >>>>> side) > >>>>> > >>>>> For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see: > >>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9989 > >>>>> > >>>>> Thank you, > >>>>> > >>>>> Alanna Paloma > >>>>> RFC Production Center > >>>>> > >>>>>> On May 12, 2026, at 11:22 AM, [email protected] wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> *****IMPORTANT***** > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Updated 2026/05/12 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> RFC Author(s): > >>>>>> -------------- > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Your document has now entered AUTH48. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> AUTH48 is being handled in GitHub as part of the GitHub pilot > >>>>>> test (see https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=rpc- > >>>>>> github-phase-0-pilot-test). > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Your document is available for review at: > >>>>>> https://github.com/rfc-editor/AUTH48-rfc9989 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Please do the following: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> a) accept your invitations to join the repo as collaborators. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> b) see the README for details on the AUTH48 process: > >>>>>> https://github.com/rfc-editor/AUTH48- > >>>>>> rfc9989/blob/Approved/README.md > >>>>>> > >>>>>> c) review and resolve the issues: > >>>>>> https://github.com/rfc-editor/AUTH48-rfc9989/issues > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Once the content is stable in GitHub, we will provide the > >>>>>> updated XML file and the output files for review and approval. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> You and your coauthors are responsible for engaging other > >>>>>> parties > >>>>>> (e.g., Contributors or Working Group) as necessary before > >>>>>> providing > >>>>>> your approval. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Once the document has been reviewed and approved by all of the > >>>>>> authors, > >>>>>> it will be published as an RFC. If an author is no longer > >>>>>> available, there are several remedies available as listed in the > >>>>>> FAQ (https://www.rfc-editor.org/faq/). > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Please let us know if you have any questions. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thank you for your cooperation, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> RFC Editor > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -------------------------------------- > >>>>>> RFC 9989 (draft-ietf-dmarc-dmarcbis-41) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Title : Domain-based Message Authentication, > >>>>>> Reporting, and Conformance (DMARC) > >>>>>> Author(s) : T. Herr, Ed., J. Levine, Ed. > >>>>>> WG Chair(s) : Barry Leiba, Seth Blank > >>>>>> Area Director(s) : Andy Newton, Charles Eckel > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> Regards, > >>>> John Levine, [email protected], Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet > >>>> for Dummies", > >>>> Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. > >>>> https://jl.ly > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Todd > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >> Regards, > >> John Levine, [email protected], Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY > >> Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. > >> https://jl.ly > > -- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
