Re: [apps-discuss] Updating the status of SPF

[Barry Leiba <[e-mail]>]

> I would merely add a charter point saying something like "The working group
> shall ensure that no changes are made that prevent full backward compatibility
> with RFC4408 unless such changes are urgently needed."

I think the real point here is not just to *say* that, but to explain
what's going on.  Put it in the context of what the WG *is* and
*isn't* doing at this stage.

That means that what you want to say is that the working group is, at
this charter stage, documenting the *existing*, widely implemented
protocol, which has sufficiently broad, interoperable deployment to be
on Standards Track.  Say that there are suggestions for changes that
are not part of the current widespread implementation, some of which
are not backward compatible, and that *all* these changes (whether
backward compatible or not) could be in scope for a future recharter
or new working group, but are not in scope here.

Barry, as participant