Re: [Ietf-dkim] Rechartering

2022-12-23 Thread Murray S. Kucherawy
On Fri, Dec 23, 2022 at 1:17 PM Michael Thomas 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 b

Re: [Ietf-dkim] Rechartering

2022-12-23 Thread Dave Crocker
On 12/23/2022 11:38 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: Having heard no further feedback, I've moved the draft charter to the next state, which will trigger the first of two IESG reviews early in the new year.  It will go out for full IETF review after it passes the first of those. The draft looks

Re: [Ietf-dkim] Rechartering

2022-12-23 Thread Michael Thomas
On 12/23/22 11:38 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 7:25 PM Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: I've synthesized the feedback to date into a new update to the charter text.  It calls out the order of operations the group seems to prefer, and makes explicit the possibl

Re: [Ietf-dkim] Rechartering

2022-12-23 Thread Murray S. Kucherawy
On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 7:25 PM Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: > > I've synthesized the feedback to date into a new update to the charter > text. It calls out the order of operations the group seems to prefer, and > makes explicit the possible output of a "best practices" update. Let me > know if t