Eric, Yes, I am viewing my comments 100% as input for the WG.
I admit I am not IETF-schooled, and frankly, maybe selfishly as a short term participant in my email security research sabbatical, I am just trying to provide input for a promising industry revamping technology that will have a direct effect on all of us. Even if some unintentional (or maybe incompatible) public discourse is revealed, I have always had tremendous amount of faith in the common sense and expertise with the cognizant engineers in the WG involved in molding this IETF standardization process. A bit slow for my taste, nonetheless, I do understand why that is the case. I do wish to comment I am perplexed as to why there seems to be lacking a delegated effort in putting together a complete threat analysis. I was going to volunteer myself, but I didn't want to step on any toes nor duplicate any effort, or bite into something that wasn't desired. Anyway, thanks and I appreciate your advice and comments. It helps. -- Hector Santos, Santronics Software, Inc. http://www.santronics.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Allman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Hector Santos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Barry Leiba" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2005 7:27 PM Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM proposed charter tweak > Hector, I like your table, but I hope you are viewing this as input > into the working group rather than as a precondition for creating the > working group. And to be clear, I'm fine with including advice to > deployers about how to react in the scope of the WG. > > Like several others here, I'm concerned that we're being nudged > toward doing an unusual amount of work before chartering. The most > obvious of this is the Threat Analysis, which seems to be a moving > target with no sign that it is going to stabilize in my lifetime. If > we're also being told that we have to specify the verifier behavior > as a precondition for chartering then I suspect that we'll end up > being told to essentially write all the documents before we're > allowed to charter. Which is I guess one way to make it both the > shortest and the longest WG on record simultaneously. > > eric > _______________________________________________ ietf-dkim mailing list http://dkim.org
