Re: [openpgp] heads-up: re-chartering the OPENPGP WG

Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu> Wed, 04 November 2020 20:24 UTC

Return-Path: <kaduk@mit.edu>
X-Original-To: openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 444993A0D20 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 12:24:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wEH-Ce53qGxd for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 12:24:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu [18.9.28.11]) (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 DEAA13A0CE7 for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Wed, 4 Nov 2020 12:24:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from kduck.mit.edu ([24.16.140.251]) (authenticated bits=56) (User authenticated as kaduk@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id 0A4KOK3X012916 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 4 Nov 2020 15:24:25 -0500
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 12:24:20 -0800
From: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
To: Derek Atkins <derek@ihtfp.com>, Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
Cc: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, "openpgp@ietf.org" <openpgp@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <20201104202420.GT39170@kduck.mit.edu>
References: <20201020215929.GR39170@kduck.mit.edu> <260d532c97cfcf8285f68fa6080c809317646a76.camel@16bits.net> <73b6595fad9bd10d2772a5c6842adabc.squirrel@mail2.ihtfp.org> <0FC168CB-4394-4924-82B9-B40A15969FF0@ribose.com> <8e5fca53-4a3c-bb64-ef87-3a0f9d4bc11b@cs.tcd.ie> <c95cec411011a61ff99ea35d5eaa40b5.squirrel@mail2.ihtfp.org> <a97e03af-364b-d4ce-fab0-9b6fa184d1a0@cs.tcd.ie> <58d51c58b524765c9952a3502f70dbcb.squirrel@mail2.ihtfp.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <58d51c58b524765c9952a3502f70dbcb.squirrel@mail2.ihtfp.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/MyMhcDzLlu-lTha_TVmvn_VfB2k>
Subject: Re: [openpgp] heads-up: re-chartering the OPENPGP WG
X-BeenThere: openpgp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Ongoing discussion of OpenPGP issues." <openpgp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/openpgp>, <mailto:openpgp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/openpgp/>
List-Post: <mailto:openpgp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:openpgp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/openpgp>, <mailto:openpgp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2020 20:24:33 -0000

Hi Derek, Paul,

On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 08:36:25AM -0400, Derek Atkins wrote:
> 
> On Wed, October 21, 2020 8:33 am, Stephen Farrell wrote:
> >
> > On 21/10/2020 13:01, Derek Atkins wrote:
> 
> >>
> >> Or is the plan to start from the current rfc4880bis draft and work from
> >> there to get it across the finish line?
> >
> > More or less.
> >
> > There will of course need to be a discussion about WG
> > adoption of a draft but IIUC the goal will be for that to
> > basically start from the current bis draft. What I don't
> > know is whether or not there are parts in the current draft
> > that a WG would rather not have and how that might affect
> > people's opinions on adoption. I do believe a WG would want
> > almost all of the bis text so starting from testing that
> > (via a WG adoption discussion) seems like a plan to me.
> > But again, that's getting a bit ahead of ourselves.
> >
> >> The current wording in the charter leads me to the former and not the
> >> latter process.  Can you please confirm?
> >
> > Feel free to suggest some words pointing out it's the
> > latter. (Or I can try later on, if that's better.)
> 
> Maybe the simplest way would be to change:
> 
> The Working Group will perform the following work:
> 
> - Revise RFC4880
> 
> to read:
> 
> - Revise RFC4880.  The intent is to start from the current rfc4880bis draft.

I'm happy to put that change in, as it reflects what I understand to be the
universal or near-universal sentiment.


On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 09:29:48PM -0400, Paul Wouters wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Oct 2020, Stephen Farrell wrote:
> 
> > The draft charter is at [1].
> 
> I would remove the "Other work related to OpenPGP" section. One of the
> issues in this group has been sudden new items appearing and being
> worked on without consensus. Modify the charter after 4880bis is done
> to do "other work"

I didn't see anyone else respond on this point, even with Stephen's
prompting, so I didn't make a change at this time.  Happy to revisit it if
needed, especially if there are text suggestions.  On a more practical
note, I think it would be hard to keep us from talking about other things,
so to some extent that paragraph is just conceding to reality, while
acknowledging that we do want to try to stay focused on 4880bis.

Thanks to everyone for all the feedback and being understanding about the
slightly weird process I ended up having this recharter go through.

-Ben