Re: [Ietf-dkim] Welcome to the rechartered working group

[Scott Kitterman <[e-mail]>]

On Friday, March 10, 2023 9:14:05 AM EST Laura Atkins wrote:
> > On 9 Mar 2023, at 22:47, Michael Thomas <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > 
> > On 3/7/23 4:09 AM, Laura Atkins wrote:
> >> There is a current problem statement at
> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-chuang-dkim-replay-problem/.
> >> Please take a moment to read through it and provide feedback. This chair
> >> thinks we should not be providing solutions in the problem statement. We
> >> should be primarily describing what the issue is and why we think the
> >> issue is with the protocol. We will deal with solutions in the actual
> >> document.> 
> > What about solutions that have been tried but have drawbacks or are
> > ineffective? It would be nice to know what the current baseline is.
> In some respects that depends on what form the final document takes. If we
> do decide that the underlying problem is something that can be addressed
> with a protocol change, then we probably won’t mention mitigation steps
> that have been tried and either have drawbacks or are ineffective. If the
> outcome is a document that we looked at the problem and decided that the
> issue isn’t with the protocol and we recommend no protocol changes then I
> can see the work product being a discussion of non-protocol solution space.
> That would include different things folks have tried what works and what
> doesn’t work.

My suggestion is plan on both.

My takeaway from the rechartering discussions is that if there is a protocol 
solution to this problem, it will not be simple and will take quite some time 
to be effective since wide deployment would be needed.  As a result, there will 
be, at best, a significant period of time where whatever mitigations/work-
arounds that are available will be needed.  I think we should plan on 
documenting them regardless of the outcome of the protocol solution work.

Scott K