[mail-vet-discuss] list management and invitees

[Dave Crocker]

> I'd say it should be open for now (the IESG won't like the idea of 
> "consensus" established on a closed list).  I'd also like to announce 
> its presence at least to estg-general, and maybe ietf-dkim.  Objections?


there is no "for now".  once it is open, it must stay open.  if we start closed, 
we can open it later.

as for the ietf, the question is whether this round of activity is intended to 
be by a kind of design team or is for the purpose of garnering wider community 
support.  the former is best kept small.  the latter must, of course, be open.

i'm simply trying to make sure i understand what your immediate goals are, and 
then have the list run in the way that reflects that.

So, let me try an empirical test to answer this:

1. Is the spec auth-result spec reasonably mature?

2. Are the anticipated changes reasonably small?

3. Is the primary goal to do a final round of public tuning and vetting, in 
support of submitting as an individual submission to Proposed Standard or is the 
desire to spin up a working group?  (I recommend the former.)

My own sense of things is that 1 and 2 are yes and 3 is yes to the first part.

That means the list should be wide open, but with firmly stated focus and 
enforcement.

Thoughts?


d/

-- 

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