On 7/9/2014 10:31 AM, Barry Leiba wrote: >> This seems like a reasonable compromise with the overall DMARC effort. >> However, this charter seems to provide pretty huge scope. Can it be cut >> up into a few chunks? It already specifies phases; perhaps we could >> charter only the first phase now? What's the compelling reason to >> charter all this work in one fell swoop? > > We have energy to do it, and we know what we want to get done. > > What's the value in breaking it up?
Right. 1. There is a limited agreement on the fine-grained details of work to do initially, although there's a better sense of that than there was the last time we tried to charter. That said, there is a certain amount of 'get started and figure out the fine-grained tasks as we progress.' This works against a highly constrained charter. 2. The tasks that /are/ in the charter are complementary. I, too, do not see the benefit of gating on a 'first' set of tasks. If we had a sense of how the 'early' work might alter the later work, then a re-chartering effort might make sense. Absent that, it's merely imposing significant additional administrative overhead, but satisfying no apparent need. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
