[mailto:ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Alessandro
Sent: Friday, April 01, 2011 10:27 AM
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Work group future
I think it can be immensely useful if the list plainly says /why/ the
WG closes. As Rolf noted, DKIM is not (yet) a well refined protocol
that any of us would recommend his grandma to make use of.
I disagree. I wouldn't tell my grandma to use SMTP either, but it's pretty
DKIM isn't a userland thing.
I understand that such meta-standardization explanations are not
IETF's core business, but there seems to be a recurring pattern of
prematurely shut down WGs, for subjects related to spam.
I think when it's clear there's no more progress that can be made, you close
down and move on. You can always start up a WG later when there's a chance for
better progress or new work to be done.
Our outstanding chartered items have been getting nowhere for years. It seems
nonsensical to keep it open.
My guess is
that the paramount impact that spam has rouses too many people, so
that WGs become overpopulated, discussions difficult, and people
nervous. Is it so?
It's certainly true, but I don't think keeping this WG open in spite of this
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to