On 8/29/14 12:35 PM, Tim Draegen wrote:
> On Aug 29, 2014, at 12:50 PM, Pete Resnick<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Tim/Ned [Ccing WG]:
>>
>> While I think the milestones that appear in the wiki are great for internal WG management (and
in fact I think you could even add more of them), I think for the external-facing milestones on the
charter page, you should have the more common externally visible milestones like "initial draft of
X" or "submission of completed document Y to the IESG", etc.
>>
>> That work for you?
>>
> Yes it does. I'll rework the external-facing milestones to perhaps remove
some confusion.
>
Are you OK with the following edits?
Dec 2014 Complete draft on DMARC interop issues + possible methods to
address
Mar 2015 Complete draft on DMARC improvements to better support
indirect email flows
May 2015 Complete draft on DMARC Usage Guide
May 2015 Complete draft on changes to DMARC base spec
(That is, separating out the two documents from the May date, and
rewording them a bit.)
If so, I can make the changes as I approve them.
Is "complete draft" the usual way these things are done now? It used to be
that you list WGLC, LC, RFC published for each.
I have to say I like this approach a lot better. Less bureaucracy.
As for the substance, it looks fine to me.
Ned
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
