Hi Sabrina, The changes look good. Thank you!
Alanna Paloma RFC Production Center > On May 19, 2026, at 1:55 PM, Sabrina Tanamal via RT <[email protected]> > wrote: > > 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]
