Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: WG Review: Domain Keys Identified Mail (dkim)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Fellow DKIMers,

Barry Leiba wrote:
> I suggest that the IESG replace that paragraph in the proposed DKIM
> charter with the paragraph above, and that we move on from this topic
> to any others that need to be dealt with.


Well, I guess no one else is concerned about the sequence that has just taken place.

We carefully develop charter language through two, complete, multi-month rounds of open collaboration, including significant focus on exactly the language in question, both times.

Some folks come in at the late stage of the second open process and seek to change this text, but they fail to develop support.

So they re-assert their concerns again during the IETF charter last call, and now the chairs quickly concede the change, even before getting support from the rest of the group.

It's not that the proposed language is bad, it is that this sequence bodes rather poorly for dealing with further demands from folks who fail to gain support.

And it does not help that two of those doing the (re-)demanding are area directors and another an IAB member, raising the fear that the current concession is strictly to appease the authority those folks have.

All this with no specific technical concerns driving the demand.

d/

--

 Dave Crocker
 Brandenburg InternetWorking
 +1.408.246.8253
 dcrocker  a t ...
 WE'VE MOVED to:  www.bbiw.net

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]