On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 2:07 AM Paul Wouters <paul(_at_)nohats(_dot_)ca> wrote:
On Mon, 8 Feb 2016, The IESG wrote:
The IESG has received a request from the DNS-based Authentication of
Named Entities WG (dane) to consider the following document:
- 'Using DANE to Associate OpenPGP public keys with email addresses'
<draft-ietf-dane-openpgpkey-07.txt> as Experimental RFC
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org mailing lists by 2016-02-22. Exceptionally,
comments may
be
sent to iesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org instead. In either case, please retain the
beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
<DANE chair hat>
As an author, I followed the directions of the WG with respect to the
lowercasing or not of the LHS. Consensus on the issue was very confusing
and changed multiple times,
Good gods, yes. This was a contentious and confusing discussion, with many
people talking past each other, many religious views, and a number of
instances where the chairs procrastinated because we couldn't see a clear
consensus.
and I do believe the chairs made a wrong
call at some point for calling for the removal of the LHS lowercasing.
Entirely possible.
Determining consensus was tricky, and at least one of the chairs believed
that LHS lowercasing was the right thing to do - we may have swung too far
trying to avoid our biases.
Without restarting the discussion here, I would like the IESG to take
a close look at whether or not to recommend that the document be changed
to do lowercasing of the LHS when possible.
Yes please!
The implementation status section shows 3 implementations (2 written by
me, the third one being gnupg) that use a lowercase call in the
implementation.
I believe that many of us knew that this is what implementations would do,
but there was a strong contingent pointing at documents saying that this
was not allowed / violated chapter and verse.
We (the chairs) are more than fine being told that we got this wrong...
W
</chair hat>
Paul