Re: [MLS] recharter text

Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> Sat, 11 November 2023 12:17 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@nohats.ca>
X-Original-To: mls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 000A8C15C2A3 for <mls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 11 Nov 2023 04:17:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.404
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.404 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nohats.ca
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cGItCO0IpzFk for <mls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 11 Nov 2023 04:17:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx.nohats.ca (mx.nohats.ca [193.110.157.85]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6279DC151535 for <mls@ietf.org>; Sat, 11 Nov 2023 04:17:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4SSF7607g6z33H; Sat, 11 Nov 2023 13:17:06 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nohats.ca; s=default; t=1699705026; bh=gzBwWKOUbIQYr/dLLDRtBm6lgW93FG5gRXqpPtnMUUM=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=Q1vpjT2YJKfm7j9ZVsSPNLz12q1HlCMcRbYdLr4fPjNcRSsHnVVHgL59tcQSavvsg HctnFIreEZ3sZKV+ydHtKEJXWvOpZyxxggJKV6pVrog2nFs2F58bl7w8w2ClSLpjxl yDTyz4uYT+DHuluVV5AI+Pd6SKQcDmMI8wW1XitY=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mx.nohats.ca
Received: from mx.nohats.ca ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id df2d1cDkgyht; Sat, 11 Nov 2023 13:17:04 +0100 (CET)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (bofh.nohats.ca [193.110.157.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Sat, 11 Nov 2023 13:17:04 +0100 (CET)
Received: by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 6E39610B84A4; Sat, 11 Nov 2023 07:17:03 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AD8910B84A3; Sat, 11 Nov 2023 07:17:03 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2023 07:17:03 -0500
From: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
To: Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com>
cc: Sean Turner <sean@sn3rd.com>, MLS List <mls@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <CACsn0cnXFs4R90F=7mvXsYggN=_QRJCvBVW+VF4EHd_8oEE8wg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3ee585b6-5144-d65b-75e0-5f78ab7cdb53@nohats.ca>
References: <E7722644-F886-46AF-A262-D3404CBDC99B@sn3rd.com> <CACsn0cnXFs4R90F=7mvXsYggN=_QRJCvBVW+VF4EHd_8oEE8wg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mls/MOAQGCtI9DvdMF6cNn38uFrzR6o>
Subject: Re: [MLS] recharter text
X-BeenThere: mls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Messaging Layer Security <mls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mls>, <mailto:mls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mls/>
List-Post: <mailto:mls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mls>, <mailto:mls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2023 12:17:13 -0000

On Fri, 10 Nov 2023, Watson Ladd wrote:

> Does a saving clause of "such other extensions as the working group
> consensus deems advisable" sound good?

No - Recursive chartering loops are not allowed :-)

The charter shows the important things the WG want to work on first.

Having statements along the lines of "anything goes" won't help keep
the WG stay focussed and won't help us evaluate how the WG is doing
on its goals. I would not like to see 20 draft documents that are all
in flight and not getting proper attention because everyone is working
on their own draft only and no one is reviewing all the other drafts.

However, you get a beverage of choice for your pentest of the chartering
system :)

Paul