Re: [dmarc-ietf] Charter improvements

[Scott Kitterman <[e-mail]>]

"J. Trent Adams" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>Thanks, everyone, for their input on this thread (and to John for the
>pointer how to get back to land when I blundered into the wrong
>stream).
>Editing the proposed charter is a lot easier with this feedback.
>
>From what I can tell, the most important question needing to be
>answered
>is whether or not revising the base DMARC specification is within scope
>of the proposed work group. Following Russ's guidance, it seems that we
>should start from the assumption that it's not in scope for now given
>the fact that it's being sponsored by an AD as an Individual
>Submission.
>
>Regardless of whether that's the right path, or not, let's explore it
>as
>an option and see how the rest of the items identified in the proposed
>charter play out. Then we can leverage the outcome of the conversation
>to potentially revisit the fate of the base specification itself.

If the base spec is out of scope, I think the entire effort should be deferred until after it's done. I don't think it makes sense to spin up a working group to work on extensions until they can leverage a stable foundation. 

Scott K