On 12/23/22 10:25 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
On Fri, Dec 23, 2022 at 1:17 PM Michael Thomas <m...@mtcc.com> wrote:
Shouldn't the problem statement explore whether there is a
plausible tractable solution before it moves on to protocol work?
That is, if there isn't a tractable solution the wg should go into
hibernation again. I'm pretty sure that I brought this quite a
while ago. Of if not the problem statement, afterward just
evaluating for a go-no go decision before starting any work.
A working group is implicitly allowed to admit defeat if it decides it
can't solve the problem it thought it was supposed to solve. DBOUND
comes to mind; it deadlocked on whether the problem was tractable, or
even well enough understood, to advance a consensus protocol solution,
and closed without producing anything.
I don't think the charter has to say that expressly. It's part of the
process. The charter stipulates an ordering, and I think that's
sufficient.
I think it's worthwhile for the charter to have a step which is to
determine whether the problem is 1) tractable and 2) requires IETF to do
something. If either of those are false, the charter should say that it
is completed. There has been quite a bit of skepticism expressed (and
not just by me) about both of those points so it would be good to have a
checkpoint before doing something to do something.
Mike
_______________________________________________
Ietf-dkim mailing list
Ietf-dkim@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-dkim
