On Sun, Jul 5, 2020 at 8:35 PM Hector Santos <[email protected]> wrote:

> 1) Curious, are these Mail List Server (MLS) developers active
> participants of the WG list?  Lurkers?  Was there a consideration to
> include a MLS developer participant that is active in the WG? I'm sure
> you are aware SSI (Santronics Software, Inc) has a MLS albeit
> commercial, not free, not open source.
>

The ones I've approached are not here, so that's why I reached out to
them.  You, on the other hand, are already participating, and are free to
give your perspective.

2) Was Mailman asked (the other two MLS were not) if a simple DNS
> lookup can be considered? IMO, as a MLS developer, it would be less
> coding than making a more complex change with this proposal or ARC.
> Given the proposal would be asking MLS developers to finally make
> changes to their code, it opens an opportunity to explore other
> available well-defined, empirically proven to work "running code"
> options.
>

No, I have not put that question to them.  If they join the list, you could
ask them here; if they don't, you can reach out to them to make that
inquiry.

3) And this hurts to ask, but I believe it is a natural "IETF Discuss"
> question to ask, is there an AD vs Editor conflict here? It is more of
> a general question and not specifically address to you as WG AD and
> the proposal editor. I'm sure you can be fair, but nonetheless, I have
> an active implementer "fairness" concern with each of these itemize
> questions.
>

Fair question.

Area directors are not barred from participating in working groups.  If the
WG were to choose to adopt this draft, for example, the chairs would have
the choice of picking a different editor, as they do with any other
document.  It would be the chairs that make consensus calls as needed as
the document evolves.  They run the Working Group Last Call.  Once it gets
sent up for IETF-wide Last Call, some other Area Director would step in to
run it through that part of the process (probably Barry, the other ART AD,
but not necessarily).  And when it gets to IESG balloting, I would recuse
myself.  If at any point it looks like a conflict of interest is possible,
we tag other Area Director(s) to review it for undue influence.

-MSK
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc

Reply via email to