On 3/31/25 19:49, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: > On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 11:49 AM Daniel K. <[email protected]> wrote: > Since I joined, I do not remember any, "we'll likely abandon failure > reporting" statements being made. > > My recollection is that we started tossing around the idea of dropping > it around the time of this thread: > > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/ul1jf_q_aULEaNMDf6eoF3uFG-c/
Thanks, I read through the thread, and conclude in the same way as Ale did in his reply. Paraphrased: Let's get a move on. That decision predates my involvement by about 2 years. It is mentioned several times in that thread that failure reporting is going on by private arrangement. For this reason too, I think a proper format for the reports should be specified. > In the last few years, there's been nearly zero work put into developing > that document. The authors occasionally updated it, but in at least one > spot a new version was posted mainly just to reset the six month > expiration clock on the draft. I would say the WG (as a whole) lost > interest in working on it. I have reviewed and sent pull requests for all the DMARC documents, and I was under the impression that there was in fact just polishing left to do on this one, RFC Editor work. I do not understand what held it up, if not the 'excessive amount of pages for review' at the same time I mentioned up-thread. > It's possible we never actually decided formally to drop it, but in any > event, it was pretty clear to me as the Area Director at the time that > we no longer had the energy to do more. I don't know what we think is > different today. Looking back through the archives, I see now that there were notices from Barry via Datatracker about "Publication has been requested for dmarcbis / aggregate reporting" in October and November of last year. This is where I think I could have, but did not pick up on the fact that such a publication request was not made for failure reporting as well. It's unfortunate that this did not get more attention at the time. If we were to reopen the WG with the charter of 'Get failure reporting done', am I wrong to think that the document is mostly finished and ready to be sent through the pipeline? Ale and Steven, as editors, are you game to see it through if such a course was feasible? I can donate some cycles if there's anything I can do to help move it along, but I have very little experience with the failure reporting part of DMARC, and would need guidance as to what exactly I can do to help out. Daniel K. _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
