RFC 7001: Message Header Field for Indicating Message Authentication Status
This RFC has been replaced. Do not implement against it for new work — it was formally obsoleted by RFC 7601.
Current document in this lineage: RFC 8601 — Message Header Field for Indicating Message Authentication Status
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
This document specifies a message header field called Authentication- Results for use with electronic mail messages to indicate the results of message authentication efforts. Any receiver-side software, such as mail filters or Mail User Agents (MUAs), can use this header field to relay that information in a convenient and meaningful way to users or to make sorting and filtering decisions.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC7001
- Published
- September 2013
- Authors
- M. Kucherawy
- Status
- PROPOSED STANDARD
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- art
- Pages
- 43
- Also known as
- —
Topics
Standards lineage
This document is one revision in a chain of 6 RFCs, each formally replacing the one before it.
Read the full history of Message Header Field for Indicating Message Authentication Status →
Referenced by
2 later RFCs formally update or obsolete part of this document.
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 8601Message Header Field for Indicating Message Authentication StatusCurrent
May 2019
- RFC 6008Authentication-Results Registration for Differentiating among Cryptographic ResultsCurrent
September 2010
- RFC 7070An Architecture for Reputation ReportingCurrent
November 2013
- RFC 7071A Media Type for Reputation InterchangeCurrent
November 2013
- RFC 7072A Reputation Query ProtocolCurrent
November 2013
- RFC 7073A Reputation Response Set for Email IdentifiersCurrent
November 2013
- RFC 5518Vouch By ReferenceUpdated
April 2009
- RFC 5617DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) Author Domain Signing Practices (ADSP)Updated
August 2009
Also filed under
About this page
The document record above — title, authors, date, status, stream, area, relationships, DOI and errata — is imported verbatim from the public RFC Editor index. The “in plain English” section is editorial: written by The metasystema editorial team, not part of the RFC. Where the two differ, the RFC text governs.
Last checked against the RFC Editor index on . RFCs are never revised after publication; changes are issued as new documents.
Data sources · Editorial policy · Report a correction · What is an RFC?