On 9 Nov 2024, at 17:25, Pete Resnick wrote:
> On 9 Nov 2024, at 17:07, Jim Fenton wrote: > >> On 9 Nov 2024, at 13:16, Pete Resnick wrote: >> >>> On 9 Nov 2024, at 8:38, Jim Fenton wrote: >>> >>>> suggest that the charter acknowledge that scalability is important and >>>> stop there. >>> >>> Well, I would also like something that is clear that running code is >>> favored to a completely unimplemented proposal. Text welcome. >> >> I suggest that paragraph 5 of the draft charter be replaced with: >> >> It is expected that design proposals will be tested during the development >> of specifications. The working group will favor designs that are tested with >> running code and that demonstrate interoperability. > > How about adding, "Scalability is also an important design consideration that > the WG will take into account."? I agree that we ought not be excluding small > providers, but we also can't start adding features (or at the very least > required features) that only work for small providers and cannot work at > scale for the larger ones. As you say, no bad faith assumed, but we all know > of WGs that have gone off the rails with lots of interesting features that > work in theory. Works for me. I meant to say something about scalability in my suggestion above but forgot to put that in. -Jim _______________________________________________ Ietf-dkim mailing list -- ietf-dkim@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to ietf-dkim-le...@ietf.org