I don't plan any changes except for those in response to last call comments.  
Unless I get direction otherwise, I don't plan any updates until after last 
call is over.

Please review this one.

Scott K

On July 10, 2019 11:10:25 PM UTC, "Kurt Andersen (b)" <[email protected]> wrote:
>I, for one, would *really* like to see the rumored "next version" from
>Scott and prefer to comment on that one, rather than an at-best
>penultimate
>version.
>
>--Kurt
>
>On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 1:21 PM Seth Blank <seth=
>[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> There is one week left before WGLC closes, and the below three items
>still
>> need resolution. Please speak up!
>>
>> -- Seth, as Secretary
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 2:21 PM Seth Blank <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> As Secretary, there are three items that have not yet reached
>consensus
>>> that must be resolved during WGLC:
>>>
>>> 1. What further context is needed in the introduction
>>> 2. If explicit call outs to ICANN/limited operator capacity to
>implement
>>> are needed
>>> 3. If an np= tag is needed to allow PSD functioning for only
>NXDOMAINs
>>>
>>> Seth
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 2:08 PM Murray S. Kucherawy
><[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> This message begins Working Group Last Call for
>draft-ietf-dmarc-psd,
>>>> which is currently at version 04.  An 05 may appear shortly with
>some text
>>>> changes that were previously discussed on the list; these do not
>include
>>>> any technical changes (I believe) so the author is free to update
>with only
>>>> those changes as planned.
>>>>
>>>> Please review the document and submit your feedback by Wednesday,
>July
>>>> 17th.  We would ideally like to have enough responses to support
>our claim
>>>> to the IESG that the document clearly has working group consensus.
>>>>
>>>> Note that we will be in pre-meeting draft embargo at that time so a
>new
>>>> version dealing with any feeback cannot appear until IETF 105
>begins on the
>>>> 22nd.
>>>>
>>>> I'm planning to do my own review as the document shepherd with an
>eye
>>>> toward consumption by readers with only a passing familiarity with
>DMARC.
>>>> If anyone wants to join me in looking at it through that lens,
>you'd be
>>>> welcome.
>>>>
>>>> -MSK, co-chairin'
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> dmarc mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>
>> *Seth Blank* | Director, Industry Initiatives
>> *e:* [email protected]
>> *p:* 415.273.8818
>>
>>
>>
>> This email and all data transmitted with it contains confidential
>>
>> and/or proprietary information intended solely for the use of
>>
>> individual(s) authorized to receive it. If you are not an intended
>>
>> and authorized recipient you are hereby notified of any use,
>>
>> disclosure, copying or distribution of the information included in
>>
>> this transmission is prohibited and may be unlawful. Please
>>
>> immediately notify the sender by replying to this email and then
>>
>> delete it from your system.
>> _______________________________________________
>> dmarc mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
>>

_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc

Reply via email to