The question that I think IESG should be asking themselves is how is this
similar and/or different from other groups the have chartered or will in the
future. Nearly every group has some people with a fairly strong idea of at
least one way to solve the problem. Without this, it is usually not clear
the work is even possible. Now some groups, XMPP for example, perhaps TLS
long ago, have substantial deployment with difficult backwards compatibility
questions - theses situation might require the charter to provide more than
normal limitations to the scope of the solutions that are possible. I'm
failing to see that dkim has existing deployments or difficult backwards
compatibility problem that would cause the need for some special text in the
charter more than you average WG.
The need for special text is not due to existing deployments or
backwards compatibility problems; it is due to the existence of a small
number of individuals who have a history of arguing quite forcefully
that certain design decisions are carved in stone, despite the problems
caused by those decisions and the lack of any working group consensus on
those decisions. Said individuals have also been known to make
misleading statements to support their arguments.
Keith
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf