Re: [Last-Call] Last Call: BCP 83 PR-Action Against Dan Harkins

Brian E Carpenter <> Mon, 03 October 2022 01:04 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BBADC14F73E for <>; Sun, 2 Oct 2022 18:04:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.109
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.109 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xMUGyAE0jSuF for <>; Sun, 2 Oct 2022 18:04:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::102e]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F010CC14F736 for <>; Sun, 2 Oct 2022 18:04:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id gf8so6080213pjb.5 for <>; Sun, 02 Oct 2022 18:04:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date; bh=mm6xCjgsvNoMzMsq8lYiNEifWWyNA1ewJwKPzPd+ZVE=; b=g8pShtjHbUE6yXhJCIONs5kLW6wJgTah8SBH1v/XW0m+icG4LWVn9eQ7qmhIzlZCSn 22Tni8LfI7sFjXn7Ie+qe047yn1jRk3SzqPsKyCMCbVmkmjUnRKnbtzncfteLcYuhmzr Rd0ndLCYwtGh2ziW4PVyS1rtLx2VdJrdwHJZtAoygmH8rvrkz/oMA/BJg0gISkp+A/i0 BQFYk1v8s6fUOBPYGqpVBB8jZVrYSYp0MSPeZrNUcs9ZX0ltT5K9Mk52zZ7xubzpVuuG OKzhPa6Uwjv8XQgJQnCz95nF9cufsSmI/9+mBkeuZKUW8QYQJWWsLPw009RPWoXYThql s1KA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date; bh=mm6xCjgsvNoMzMsq8lYiNEifWWyNA1ewJwKPzPd+ZVE=; b=eXiqVt0qPtk/btJCw8MoVHlwPGephFhLOx4x+33EqFkuI33Ok6zhKl3Iz8WJXgv8Y/ gQKSyC3P15w54yfB4CbaGrRdS6ZMtmNizdfPjJGnKTwbQZI74Vv/KMy7ZeH/3IjIYpTT WSTrNGIwgQKPGlNR0PV6/x+jOM74I3ko5wyiWMKbYATf3www7zj2rxDQOJb9ye1NU6aQ I/lDH4ze0IaSsESv0Psbs/CChWhwmIQgG+NpZxy/C7JBmPpI3ZxPQj2opVyFVuy115vb kinR94yxDGfssxYAAL/a4xmI8ZRW0+gY0zmHBHtBteA6CF8/6bCr8t6bQBD1lLJnSM3f DVOA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf0PcorXyd2oHK9zI/UpkdTFnICmbhqjdqH01z305EWpAiCpAJuU gBtIYmy8tRt3RRfuxRMwK8M=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM4N7GHQvRsI4ud+7/32kD4AXjVgnGQE+8kIpGNmA/xyw8pGTpE8fvTmaEMbUIrqQ5pLH0h1iQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:903:2691:b0:17a:8f3:bef0 with SMTP id jf17-20020a170903269100b0017a08f3bef0mr9799242plb.17.1664759051177; Sun, 02 Oct 2022 18:04:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPV6:2406:e003:1124:9301:80b2:5c79:2266:e431? ([2406:e003:1124:9301:80b2:5c79:2266:e431]) by with ESMTPSA id o2-20020a625a02000000b0054cd16c9f6bsm5975191pfb.200.2022. (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 02 Oct 2022 18:04:10 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2022 14:04:05 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.10.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: Keith Moore <>,
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
From: Brian E Carpenter <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Last-Call] Last Call: BCP 83 PR-Action Against Dan Harkins
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Last Calls <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2022 01:04:14 -0000

On 03-Oct-22 13:17, Keith Moore wrote:
> On 10/2/22 19:55, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
>> I would also like to see a rule that any WG chair who starts off with a statement of the form 'we have to do this in 12 months so we have to do it this way' is automatically booted from the WG 12 months later. Every single time I have seen that used it has been playing dirty pool and none of the WGs has delivered anything of note in four years.
> I would instead say that any group that, whether via the charter or the chair, is told "you have to do it this way" should be immediately shut down.

Hang on. There are occasions when the charter is quite restrictive for a good reason connected with the "running code" part of our mantra. For example, I think the original NFS WG was restricted by backwards-compatibility with proprietary NFS. (However, I don't know where I'd look to find the original NFS charter.) In the current DMARC charter it says:

"The working group will seek to preserve interoperability with the
installed base of DMARC systems, and provide detailed justification
for any non-interoperability."

I'm sure there are many other examples, as well as quite a lot of charters referring to a personal I-D as a starting point. So while charters cannot preempt the final rough consensus, they can certainly restrict the starting point.