diff --git a/proposals/xxxx-e2e-verification-in-dms.md b/proposals/xxxx-e2e-verification-in-dms.md
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..14b706dd2
--- /dev/null
+++ b/proposals/xxxx-e2e-verification-in-dms.md
@@ -0,0 +1,102 @@
+# Key verification in DMs
+
+Currently, key verification is done using `to_device` messages.  However, since
+`to_device` messages are not part of a timeline, there is no user-visible record
+of the key verification.
+
+## Proposal
+
+The current [key verification
+framework](https://matrix.org/docs/spec/client_server/r0.5.0#key-verification-framework)
+will be replaced by a new framework that uses room messages rather than
+`to_device` messages.  Key verification messages will be sent in a [Direct
+Messaging](https://matrix.org/docs/spec/client_server/r0.5.0#id185) room.  If
+there is no Direct Messaging room between the two users involved, the client
+that initiates the key verification will create one.
+
+In this proposal, we use "Alice" to denote the user who initiates the key
+verification, and "Bob" to denote the other user involved in the key
+verification.
+
+### General framework
+
+#### Requesting a key verification
+
+To request a key verification, Alice will send an `m.room.message` event with the
+following properties in its contents:
+
+- `body`: a fallback message to alert users that their client does not support
+  the key verification framework, and that they should use a different method
+  to verify keys
+- `msgtype`: `m.key.verification.request`
+- `methods`: the verification methods supported by Alice's client
+
+Key verifications will be identified by the event ID of the key verification
+request event.
+
+Clients should ignore verification requests that have been accepted or cancelled.
+
+#### Accepting a key verification
+
+To accept a key verification, Bob will send an `m.key.verification.start` event
+with the following properties in its contents:
+
+- `m.relates_to`: an object with the properties:
+  - `rel_type`: `m.key.verification`
+  - `event_id`: the event ID of the key verification request that is being
+    accepted
+- `method`: the key verification method that is being used
+
+Clients should ignore `m.key.verification.start` events that correspond to
+verification requests that it did not send.
+
+Clients may use this event as a place in the room's timeline do display
+progress of the key verification process and to interact with the user as
+necessary.
+
+#### Rejecting a key verification
+
+To reject a key verification, Bob will send an `m.key.verification.cancel`
+event with the following properties in its contents:
+
+- `m.relates_to`: an object with the properties:
+  - `rel_type`: `m.key.verification`
+  - `event_id`: the event ID of the key verification that is being cancelled
+- `body`: A human readable description of the `code`. The client should only
+  rely on this string if it does not understand the `code`.
+- `code`: The error code for why the process/request was cancelled by the
+  user. The contents are the same as the `code` property of the currently
+  defined [`m.key.verification.cancel` to-device
+  event](https://matrix.org/docs/spec/client_server/r0.5.0#m-key-verification-cancel)
+
+This message may be sent at any point in the key verification process.  Any
+subsequent key verification messages relating to the same request are ignored.
+However, this does not undo any verifications that have already been done.
+
+#### Other events
+
+Key verification methods may define their own event types, or extensions to the
+above event types.  All events sent as part of a key verification process
+should have an `m.relates_to` property as defined for
+`m.key.verification.accept` or `m.key.verification.cancel` events.
+
+Clients should ignore events with an `m.relates_to` that have a `rel_type` of
+`m.key.verification` that refer to a verification where it is not the requester
+nor the accepter.
+
+### SAS  verification
+
+The messages used in SAS verification are the same as those currently defined,
+except that instead of the `transaction_id` property, an `m.relates_to`
+property, as defined above, is used instead.
+
+## Tradeoffs
+
+
+## Potential issues
+
+
+## Security considerations
+
+
+## Conclusion