Re: [ietf-822] We need a DKIM Policy Working Group

[S Moonesamy <[e-mail]>]

Hi Hector,
At 11:10 30-04-2014, Hector Santos wrote:
>If you are talking about a resigner kludge that could bypass policy, 
>then I am against that.  Any solution must be permission based. I 
>believe that may have been your first design assumption.
>
>I suggest spinning up a DKIM POLICY working group to begin updating:
>
>      RFC5016 Requirements for a DKIM Signing Practices Protocol
>      http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5016
>
>We need to revisit and reconfirm what are the possible policies. 
>What predictably started this mess was the last minute inclusion of 
>section 5.3, item 10:

The steps for setting up such a working group would be:

   1. Someone writes a draft charter

   2. A group of people agree to that draft charter

   3. Contact relevant Area Director for next steps

I would not volunteer to write the draft charter as I don't want that headache.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy