Re: [dmarc-ietf] Mention ICANN/operational limitations was: Re: Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-dmarc-psd

[Scott Kitterman <[e-mail]>]

On Friday, July 12, 2019 1:59:55 PM EDT Stan Kalisch wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 12, 2019, at 1:41 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > On Wednesday, June 26, 2019 5:21:14 PM EDT Seth Blank wrote:
> > > As Secretary, there are three items that have not yet reached consensus
> > > that must be resolved during WGLC:
> > > 
> > > 2. If explicit call outs to ICANN/limited operator capacity to implement
> > > are needed
> > 
> > There has been feedback in favor of adding this and none against so far.
> > 
> > The specific proposal is:
> > 
> > "Please note that today's operational and policy reality prevents this
> > experiment from being deployed globally. If the experiment shows that PSD
> > solves a real problem at a large scale, the results could prove to be
> > useful in the development of policies outside of the IETF that would
> > permit its ubiquitous deployment."
> > 
> > Because RFCs are (approximately) forever, I'm concerned about words like
> > "today's" in protocol documents, even experimental ones.
> > 
> > How about this instead:
> > 
> > "As of the writing of this document operational and policy constraints
> > prevent this experiment from being deployed globally. If the experiment
> > shows that PSD solves a real problem and can be used at a large scale,
> > the results could prove to be useful in the development of policies
> > outside of the IETF that would permit broader deployment".
> 
> "[D]evelopment of policies outside of the IETF" strikes me as a little odd
> since IETF isn't setting policy *per se*, although substitute language that
> is just as succinct is escaping me at the moment.

... removal of constraints ... ???

"As of the writing of this document operational and policy constraints prevent 
this experiment from being deployed globally. If the experiment shows that PSD 
solves a real problem and can be used at a large scale, the results could 
prove to be useful in the removal of constraints outside of the IETF that 
would permit broader deployment".

Better?

Scott K