ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposed new charter

2010-02-24 09:17:46
At 22:30 23-02-10, Eliot Lear wrote:
  Typically, an interoperability survey is required to go to draft.
Considering that you may wish to reverse the order a bit.

Yes.

At 13:36 23-02-10, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-dkim-bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org [mailto:ietf-dkim-
bounces(_at_)mipassoc(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Barry Leiba
[...]
  +++ New Work +++
  The working group is now ready to switch its focus to refining and
  advancing the DKIM protocols.  The current deliverables for the
  DKIM working group are these:

  1. Advance the base DKIM protocol (RFC 4871) to Draft Standard.
     This is the first priority for the working group.

Unfortunately I don't have any background doing this kind of work, 
so I'm forced to guess.  But what about the July IETF as a "done-by" 
date?  Is that a crazy idea?

The second item (new work) is about collecting data on the 
effectiveness of the protocol.    There is an overlap with item 4.

  1. Collect data on the deployment, interoperability, and effectiveness
     of the base DKIM protocol (RFC 4871) and produce an implementation report.

  2. Advance the base DKIM protocol (RFC 4871) to Draft Standard.
     This is the first priority for the working group.

There should not be significant changes in the specification for such 
a move.  If the Working Group agrees to that, items 1 and 2 can be 
done by July.

At 01:57 24-02-10, Franck Martin wrote:
Shouldn't we move forward Murray's draft "quickly" that allows to 
report back broken DKIM signature to the validating domain?

That's on MARF's charter.

Regards,
-sm

_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html