ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Pre-picking one solution (Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: WG Review: DomainKeys Identified Mail) (dkim) {4.2}

2005-12-22 14:45:19
 
I think this is part of "divide and conquer" that is 
generally argued to be 
an useful strategy in the IETF: once we buckle down and start writing 
specs, we're documenting one approach, with one set of advantages and 
disadvantages, and are trying to prove that *this approach* 
is feasible. We 
did that to (I believe) OSPF, IPNG after the "pick one" 
round, PKIX (vs 
SPKI), IM when it was split into SIMPLE and the 2 
alternatives (with XMPP 
being a late 4th) and so on. Each of these groups could 
regard the "what 
are the alternatives" question as out of scope.

I think that's a good way to get things out the door in a reasonable 
timeframe; I also think that the IETF at the moment lacks 
venues for the 
(probably interminable) discussions about what approaches to 
a problem 
exists and whether there are non-chartered alternatives that 
are worth 
following up - but I think the approach of chartering a WG to 
look at one 
and only one approach is a reasonable one.

Well said, I agree completely.

pat

_______________________________________________
ietf-dkim mailing list
http://dkim.org

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • RE: Pre-picking one solution (Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: WG Review: DomainKeys Identified Mail) (dkim) {4.2}, Patrick Peterson <=