On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 5:07 PM Michael Thomas wrote:
>
> On 2/2/23 8:22 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
> > Colleagues,
> >
> > The IESG is prepared to approve the charter overall. There was one
> > blocking point about publishing the problem statement, which is that
> > the IESG would like that
wrote:
>
> On 2/2/23 2:16 PM, Tim Wicinski wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 5:07 PM Michael Thomas wrote:
>
>>
>> So here is what sticks in my craw. I think I brought up the problem
>> statement, but maybe somebody else did before me. It's easy to s
Dave
Thanks for publishing this. So we (as the working group) have two problem
statement drafts to read and consider.
Wonderful!
I'm going to do my reading of both (as I hope all will), but it would be
useful to the working group if the authors
could perhaps summarize the differences between th
I need to agree with Scott here. In the DNS world, we're slow to adopt new
DNSSEC crypto algorithms due to speed of deployment.
And DNSSEC has been around so long we have been giving guidance telling
people to stop using DSA and MD5.
ed25119 should be more than fine, and others can be added if the
Normally calls for adoptions are two weeks, and while we have had some
strong discussions, I would rather not close it out early and
have anyone speak ill.
But Barry's comments about the document being a starting point should hold
true for everyone.
tim
On Mon, Apr 10, 2023 at 2:24 PM Scott Ki
When chairs trigger a state change, you can set "Expected weeks in state"
but it is usually left blank.
Tim
Has pushed all the datatracker buttons
On Mon, Apr 10, 2023 at 2:40 PM Murray S. Kucherawy
wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 10, 2023 at 11:24 AM Scott Kitterman
> wrote:
>
>> On Monday, April 10, 20
f Laura would double
check my work)
tim
On Mon, Apr 10, 2023 at 2:42 PM Tim Wicinski wrote:
> When chairs trigger a state change, you can set "Expected weeks in state"
> but it is usually left blank.
>
> Tim
> Has pushed all the datatracker buttons
>
> On Mon, A
Hi
To make this complete the chairs will close the call for adoption on Friday
14 April 2023. This will most likely be early UTC based on my timetable.
Please make any comments about the document, we (me) will attempt to
summarize constructive comments.
I hope this works for everyone
thanks
t
On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 3:21 AM Scott Kitterman
wrote:
>
>
>
> Thanks. It wasn't clear to me what the duration of the call is. I'm less
> interested in when it ends than that the end date be defined and known to
> the working group.
>
>
> Scott K
>
>
Scott
I've sent a follow up to Laura's Call
All
The Call for adoption for draft-chuang-dkim-replay-problem has ended, and
we are adopting the work, knowing this is a starting place.
I've contacted the authors about a newly named document; and I am working
on summarizing the emails from the adoption call; *and* I am looking to put
the docum
re on this coming.
tim
-- Forwarded message -
From: IETF Meeting Session Request Tool
Date: Fri, Jun 9, 2023 at 1:24 PM
Subject: dkim - Not having a session at IETF 117
To:
Cc: , , , <
tjw.i...@gmail.com>
Tim Wicinski, a chair of the dkim working group, indicated that
Problem Statements may be published but are more importantly considered
working documents with consensus from the working group.
We should get more "what didn't work" - people should send text !
tim
On Tue, Aug 1, 2023 at 12:01 PM Dave Crocker wrote:
> On 8/1/2023 8:56 AM, Barry Leiba wrote:
Michael
Actually it appears draft-chuang-replay-resistant-arc is listed in the
charter (I had to check for myself).
We can have the larger ARC discussion but I'll want to talk to Murray and
Laura on that also.
tim
On Fri, Aug 4, 2023 at 2:27 PM Michael Thomas wrote:
>
> On 8/4/23 11:12 AM, W
ecause the IETF has this thing on Best
Practice documents)
## Milestones
* Design Overview
* Proposed Mechanism
* some period of time for interop testing
* profit
On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 5:47 PM Tim Wicinski wrote:
> Jim/Murray,
>
> Thanks for reminding some of us of the link. Chart
Jim/Murray,
Thanks for reminding some of us of the link. Charter writing can be a bit
specialized but the IESG has tried to simplify the process for new working
groups.
I do have some thoughts on text - mostly editorial.
- should have section headers for "Background", "Objectives",
"Deliverables
Dave
On Wed, Nov 27, 2024 at 7:15 PM Dave Crocker wrote:
> On 11/21/2024 1:21 AM, Bron Gondwana wrote:
>
> I have made a second pass at it. Text below, or see the raw copy at:
>
> https://notes.ietf.org/YGynIPpYS7yqg5G7ZeSQeA
>
>
> Summary:
>
>- As provided, this is an extremely broad and
Hi
I think V3 is worth having the IESG work over.
I made one small change
s/intended to them as recipients/intended them as recipients/
tim
On Sat, Dec 28, 2024 at 9:31 PM Bron Gondwana wrote:
> Based on Dave and Murray's comments in particular, here's another take!
>
> Key Changes:
>
>
Murray
On Wed, Dec 11, 2024 at 4:59 PM Murray S. Kucherawy
wrote:
> I've uploaded the charter text at the top of this thread to the tracker
> (not the one from 11/27 yet). I wanted to do another round trip on some of
> Dave's points.
>
> I am not concerned with milestones yet. The text is far
Bron
Thanks for listening to my half baked ideas. Some small tweaks can be
taken for what they are worth.
But this feels like the right balance - I vote for ship it to the IESG and
let them soil it.
tim
On Thu, Nov 21, 2024 at 4:22 AM Bron Gondwana wrote:
> Thanks to all of you for great fe
19 matches
Mail list logo
