The key document is RFC 2026. It's been updated by several other RFCs,
but none of them affect the status transitions.
The key section is "4.1.2 Draft Standard". It's five paragraphs can be
summarized as follows:
1) interoperable
a) 2 independent & interoperable implementations
b) "sufficient operational experience"
c) "a strong belief that spec is mature and will be useful"
2) interoperability is applied on a option & feature basis
a) any options or features not demonstrated to be interoperable
by independent implementations must be removed
3) WG chair responsible for documenting implementations
a) used for the qualification, and
b) documentation about the testing of the interopability.
c) Includes information on individual options/features.
d) Submits to AD.
4) DS must be
a) well understood and
b) quite stable.
c) Wide spread field experience is NOT required. ("it is
possible ... [for DS specs] to demonstrate unforeseen behavior
when subjected to large-scale use in production environments.")
5) Changes hereafter are only to fix specific problems encountered
while deploying widely.
Section 6.2 further adds
6) Must be at PS at least six months.
That pretty much covers it.
Tony Hansen
tony(_at_)att(_dot_)com
Jim Fenton wrote:
In order to level-set the group on the draft standard process, can
someone please send a pointer to the process for moving from PS to DS
(what the requirements are, and what is and isn't allowed to change)?
If more of us are on the same page with understanding that process, the
discussion is likely to be more productive.
-Jim
Barry Leiba wrote:
I have uploaded the following agenda to the IETF meeting materials manager:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/75/materials.html
------------------------------------------
Agenda for DKIM meeting at IETF 75, Stockholm
We're currently scheduled for Tuesday, 28 July, 13:00-15:00 local time.
The primary purpose of the meeting is to talk about next steps, which
may include 4871bis work.
Agenda:
1. Administrative: agenda review, WG status review, etc. (5 mins)
2. Discussion of next steps. (the rest of the time)
Specific topics for discussion:
- Is there enough energy to update DKIM base (RFC 4871) & go to draft
standard?
- Is DKIM base ready for that? Do we have enough experience to know
it's stable?
- Should we eliminate features in the process, to steamline?
- If so, what features?
- Do we have good statistics on what features are used on each side?
------------------------------------------
If anyone wants to make a specific presentation, please post here, or
let us know at <dkim-ads(_at_)tools(_dot_)ietf(_dot_)org>.
Barry (as chair)
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html