Dear IESG, Just some minor comments, mainly on wording.
On 2026-04-07 06:44, The IESG wrote:
The Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting & Conformance (dmarc) WG in the Applications and Real-Time Area of the IETF is undergoing rechartering. The IESG has not made any determination yet. The following draft charter was submitted, and is provided for informational purposes only. Please send your comments to the IESG mailing list ([email protected]) by 2026-04-16. Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting & Conformance (dmarc) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Current status: Active WG Chairs: Barry Leiba <[email protected]> Assigned Area Director: Andy Newton <[email protected]> Applications and Real-Time Area Directors: Andy Newton <[email protected]> Charles Eckel <[email protected]> Mailing list: Address: [email protected] To subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc Archive: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dmarc/ Group page: https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/dmarc/ Charter: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-dmarc/ DMARC was previously chartered to develop and publish a base document and two reporting documents. This work has been completed. In the intervening time, the working group also published the Authenticated Received Chain protocol as experimental RFC 8617. Industry experience has shown that this proposal has enjoyed neither noteworthy uptake nor sufficient impact, though it continues to develop momentum that is believed to be unsupportable by evidence.
"though it continues to develop momentum" is difficult to interpret. "continue to develop momentum" usually means that more and more people are using it, and that there's a chance that this leads to full deployment. Why then make it historic? Also, what exactly is unsupportable by evidence (i.e. what's the referent of 'that')? Probably, splitting the sentence into two (or three) sentences will help clear things up.
Accordingly, DMARC is being chartered (again) to find consensus on a document that changes RFC 8617 to historical status, including prose describing the history and current status of the work. This iteration of the DMARC working group is chartered for the sole purpose of completing this task This working group will adopt no other documents or work items. This sole task is to be completed no later than six months from working group rechartering. If this working group fails to meet this deadline, the group will close at that time.
Please add a period between 'task' and 'This'. Regards, Martin.
Milestones: Nov 2026 - Request approval of a status-change document moving ARC to Historic
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
