[dmarc-ietf] Mohamed Boucadair's No Objection on charter-ietf-dmarc-03-00: (with COMMENT)

[Mohamed Boucadair via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Mohamed Boucadair has entered the following ballot position for
charter-ietf-dmarc-03-00: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)



The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-dmarc/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Andy, DMARC WG,

Thanks for preparing the new charter. Please find below some comments:

# Status Change vs. Document

CURRENT:
  Accordingly, DMARC is being rechartered to publish a document that moves RFC
  8617 to historical/obsolete status, including prose describing the history
  and current status of the work.

## As you know, the IESG Statement on Designating RFCs as Historic [1]
clarifies the difference between the historic/obsolete.

## Publishing a document allows for more elaborated considerations to document
the reasoning and ** lack of operational impacts ** for this specific case. I
don’t know if that work already started, but if the prose is condense enough,
proceeding with a “status change” may be more appropriate. Maybe better to
leave the decision about whether to proceed with a new document or a status
change open in the charter.

## nit: s/historical/Historic to match the label we use for such status.

# RFC8617 predates draft-ietf-dmarc-dmarcbis (base doc) + reporting docs
(draft-ietf-dmarc-failure-reporting, and draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting)

CURRENT:
  DMARC was previously chartered to develop and publish a base document and two
  reporting documents. This work has been completed.

  In the intervening time, the working group also published the Authenticated
  Received Chain protocol as experimental RFC 8617.

NEW:
  DMARC was previously chartered to develop and publish a base document and two
  reporting documents. This work has been completed.

  The working group also published the Authenticated Received Chain protocol
  as an Experimental RFC (RFC 8617).

# “being rechartering” frozen in a charter seems inadequate

OLD: DMARC is being rechartered to

NEW: DMARC is rechartered to

# Consider adding an explicit milestone for better visibility on the expected
outcome.

Cheers,
Med

[1]
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/statement-iesg-iesg-statement-on-designating-rfcs-as-historic-20140720/