On Friday, March 10, 2023 9:14:05 AM EST Laura Atkins wrote: > > On 9 Mar 2023, at 22:47, Michael Thomas <m...@mtcc.com> wrote: > > > > On 3/7/23 4:09 AM, Laura Atkins wrote: > >> There is a current problem statement at > >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-chuang-dkim-replay-problem/. > >> Please take a moment to read through it and provide feedback. This chair > >> thinks we should not be providing solutions in the problem statement. We > >> should be primarily describing what the issue is and why we think the > >> issue is with the protocol. We will deal with solutions in the actual > >> document.> > > What about solutions that have been tried but have drawbacks or are > > ineffective? It would be nice to know what the current baseline is. > In some respects that depends on what form the final document takes. If we > do decide that the underlying problem is something that can be addressed > with a protocol change, then we probably won’t mention mitigation steps > that have been tried and either have drawbacks or are ineffective. If the > outcome is a document that we looked at the problem and decided that the > issue isn’t with the protocol and we recommend no protocol changes then I > can see the work product being a discussion of non-protocol solution space. > That would include different things folks have tried what works and what > doesn’t work.
My suggestion is plan on both. My takeaway from the rechartering discussions is that if there is a protocol solution to this problem, it will not be simple and will take quite some time to be effective since wide deployment would be needed. As a result, there will be, at best, a significant period of time where whatever mitigations/work- arounds that are available will be needed. I think we should plan on documenting them regardless of the outcome of the protocol solution work. Scott K _______________________________________________ Ietf-dkim mailing list Ietf-dkim@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-dkim
