Barry Leiba wrote:
Coming back to this: I've still seen very little direct input on the
charter proposal. JD likes it. Dave made some specific comments,
which I responded to; there've been no other comments on what Dave's
said. There've been no other specific proposals for changes to the
text.
Franck suggested gathering data on whether DKIM has been useful. I
responded to that, saying that I don't think it's a necessary issue
for chartering at this stage. Agreement or disagreement with that
would be useful.
Bill suggested looking at extensions for additional signature
delegation, Michael Hammer agreed, and a thread branched off from
there. Is that still an active consideration for the charter, or not?
Charles wants to see something more about guidance for mailing lists.
Is that an active consideration?
Some have opined that it's even too early to consider taking the base
DKIM protocol to Draft Standard; let's make sure we have consensus on
that point, one way or the other.
I'm generally in this latter camp. The six-month timer might be useful
for some protocols, but the huge installed base and mission-critical
nature of email causes everything to move more slowly from a deployment
standpoint.
It's fairly easy to demonstrate interoperability of protocols, but
usefulness is much more difficult. DKIM is an infrastructure protocol,
designed to provide a basis for other mechanisms, such as domain-based
reputation, to operate. Those other mechanisms are as yet nascent; how
does one judge usefulness at this point?
If this working group does continue, I'd suggest that updates to the
service overview (RFC 5585) and deployment/operations document also be
on the table. Those are the most appropriate places for the results of
operational experience to be described.
To summarize, I support waiting at least a year, perhaps more, before
progressing the WG specifications. Whether that means that the WG shuts
down and restarts or just goes dormant is a question for the IETF
process wizards.
-Jim
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html