-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 In message <[email protected]>, Dave Crocker <[email protected]> writes
> Given the considerable increase of scope for DKIM and range of > topics cited here for improvement, the charter should have a > concrete proposal to take as input, if only to provide an example > of how one might approach dealing with these topics. we wrote one! https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-gondwana-dkim2-motivation-01.html and we have been holding off publishing more (including a few refinements to this) whilst the IETF gets up to speed. >> The working group will use the mechanisms of DKIM as a basis, >> extending and modifying them to solve problems that have been >> identified in real-world usage. > Since they have been identified, they should be documented here, > clearly enough to aid the working group in knowing whether > something is in-scope our out of scope. What we wrote (which is clearly far too long to put into a charter) sets out a number of real world problems that we know need solving. One might I suppose put in the section headings, but would that mean much ? >> It will be necessary for any new design to work in parallel with >> the existing mechanisms, and have a clear upgrade path. > > If it is parallel, it is independent. So I don't know what it > means 'to work' in parallel. And I don't know what it means to not > work in parallel. If we write new headers labelled DKIM2 you can also write "DKIM1" headers into your email and existing systems will function as they do today. If you decided to overload the existing syntax with new fields (and subtly different meanings for existing fields) then there would be no parallel working and you would need to decide which regime your email was using. Also, we believe we have a plausible story about what happens when you "cross the streams", though the detail of that evolves (except Murray says I should not mention how). >> *> WG Formation: Dec 2024 >> *> Overview document adopted: Jan 2025 >> > You think it will take only one month to complete the overview > document, given what time-frames other email work has been taking? Someone told me that Working Groups had given up documenting their initial guesses at how long things will take. That seems sensible to me. Progress is determined by the engineers who work on the project (who are watching this mailing list with some bemusement). That is, once the word-smithing of a charter is completed (and it seems to be permissible not to have milestones for that). - -- richard Richard Clayton Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. Benjamin Franklin 11 Nov 1755 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPsdk version 1.7.1 iQA/AwUBZ0fEEd2nQQHFxEViEQJPhwCfW3mv6CEZ23bTDtdW1baEcIm66q8An3m3 3/GajRLEa91843k3zlG4H1YS =VULB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Ietf-dkim mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
