On Sat, Dec 31, 2022 at 1:09 PM Michael Thomas <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> On 12/29/22 7:20 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
>
> On Sun, Dec 25, 2022 at 4:14 PM Michael Thomas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Done, and thanks for that text.
>>
>> One nit, Barry's text should be above the proposals not below. It makes
>> it look like those are the only proposals on the table which I'm nearly
>> certain is not your intent.
>>
> One other thing though, should there be some bounds on what appears to be
>> the possibility of writing a BCP like document? I mean, I can think of some
>> things that could help mitigate this but they are pretty wonky and
>> definitely untested. Do we actually have that operational experience to
>> recommend anything?
>>
>
> The charter as-is is now up for IESG Evaluation and one AD has already
> commented on it, so I'm going to hold any edits until after the next
> telechat (on January 5th) so as not to give them a moving target.  After
> that I'll apply this and any other feedback.
>
> That's fine, but we can talk about it in the mean time, right? I'm not
> suggesting a specific change on the BCP part because I'm not exactly sure
> what we should do. I know that it seems "obvious" but it also seems to me
> that we could get out in the weeds really easy and recommend stuff that we
> probably shouldn't. That's what I'm struggling with respect to "bounds".
> I'm not sure that we have the operational knowledge -- or more likely
> operational knowledge that can be shared -- to recommend something?
>
I expect that one of two things will happen: (1) We will attract a
sufficiently broad set of contributors that whatever consensus they come up
with will be defensible because it collectively has the operational
knowledge and expertise to make appropriate BCP-style recommendations to
the industry, or (2) we will not, and we'll know it, and thus we'll know we
can't produce defensible advice suitable for publication.

I don't know off the top of my head what charter text I need to add to
capture this.  This is how consensus works, in my mind.  I take as evidence
of this the fact that the first incarnation of the DKIM working group knew
itself well enough to completely avoid the topic of user interfaces, for
example.

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

Reply via email to