[ietf-dkim] Re: wg formation status?

[Dave Crocker]

> AFAIK, the charter is in the works at the IESG (but I sent
> Russ a note checking)

Thanks for the update.

> Meanwhile we should continue to work the threats document
> which is scheduled for last-call in Feb.

What is still pending on the document?


In the Threat Analysis discussions I have been struck by the difference in 
clarity and apparent consensus on the issues that pertain to the core 
functions, versus those that pertain to the "policy" functions.

My suspicion is that we will not be able to reach real consensus on the 
policy-related issues until we work on the technical parts more, because the 
topic is potentially open-ended and certainly has virtually no large-scale 
Internet experience.

For the basic functions of message-signing, there is an enormous amount of 
experience already.  Hence what DKIM is trying to do involves rather 
specific deviations from well-understood practice.


Whereas, the lack of wide-spread and large-scale experience in 
policy-publishing means that the discussion is largely theoretical and risks 
debating the full range of "policies" that a sender might wish to publish. 
That range is probably close to infinite, so there is a fair chance our 
discussion of it will never converge.

All of this suggests that de-coupling the TA for the core functionality, 
from that of the policy-related enhancements, will be necessary if we are to 
stay on schedule.

d/

-- 

Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
<http://bbiw.net>