>>>>> "Dave" == Dave Crocker <dhc2@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Dave> If you have specific questions that you believe the wg needs
Dave> to attend to, then they should have been stated during the
Dave> very oppe, very lengthy (and repeated) charter development
Dave> process.
Dave, there are two ways of reading this and if people read it
incorrectly they might come across with the impression that you were
attempting to short circuit community review. The first way of
reading this is that it would be very nice if people with specific
concerns brought them up in the charter discussion. That's certainly
true. We don't want this WG review to be drawn out and we want to
move forward with WG creation. I agree strongly with that reading.
The second is that by failing to do so, people have given up their
ability to bring forward these concerns or would not be constructive
by doing so. While it is possible to be non-constructive at any stage
of the process, this is the first time that DKIM has formally been
before the community for review. We had a BOF, but that was not
attended by the entire community; this WG review is the formal point
in our process where the community can bring up concerns with the
charter.
At this stage, it is appropriate to bring up concerns or to reiterate
that a concern previously brought forward has not been addressed. In
the latter case, we solicit input from the community about whether the
concern needs to be addressed.
I realize you know all this. I've been a bit more verbose than is
strictly necessary in the hopes of letting everyone know that we do
value their constructive input but we do require they keep that input
constructive.
Thanks,
--Sam
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf