Re: [apps-discuss] DMARC working group charter proposal

[SM <[e-mail]>]

Hi Dave,
At 22:33 01-04-2013, Dave Crocker wrote:
>Please elaborate.  In particular, when has a well-constructed 
>charter constraint worked poorly?

I'll try and explain.  It might not answer the above question.  In 
general, if the author is reluctant to give the IETF change control 
it can end up as a problem during the working group work.  The 
constraints are less about what is in the charter and more about how 
to get the group to work together.

I don't know whether the DKIM charter was well-constructed or not (I 
have not looked at it recently).  I know that the question of DKIM 
was raised in one working group.  I am not thinking about whether the 
question has merit or not; in my humble opinion it makes the work 
more difficult.

>As for generating more work for the Chairs, a major selling point 
>behind tight charters is to make it easier for chairs to help the 
>working group distinguish between work that is in-scope and out of 
>scope.  Again, what examples do you have of a well-constructed 
>charter constraint causing more work for chairs?

It is not about well-constructed charters.  The charter of a 
particular working group was tightly scoped.  However, there were 
discussions about the scope.  Scope only works well when there is a 
cohesive group.  If the group is not cohesive there will likely be 
disagreement and that will cause more work for the chairs.

>And what process issues do you know of that happened?

I'll take this off-list.

Regards,
-sm