[TLS] Re: FATT Process Updates: Contacting FATT

[S Moonesamy <[e-mail]>]

Hi Usama,
At 11:56 AM 24-04-2026, Muhammad Usama Sardar wrote:
>Correct. To be clear, my proposal is not suggesting to change any of 
>that. In my proposal, FATT membership remains closed and their own 
>discussions remain private (as currently). Best is to have that open 
>too, but as I said, better to have something than nothing.
>>The procedures are silent about whether a working group participant 
>>can contact a member of the sub-group.
>Right, that's also my reading and that seems to be an opportunity 
>for discussion here. This is exactly where my proposal falls. It 
>seems we can discuss and if folks agree, possibly make a publicly 
>archived mailing list for engagement with FATT. What do you think 
>about such a mailing list? In particular, I'd value your opinion on 
>whether my arguments for such a mailing list in the previous email 
>are reasonable.
>>   There isn't any requirement in BCP 11 for the member of the 
>> sub-group to respond, if he/she was contacted.
>
>Correct. I am not suggesting to change that. Aim is to provide a 
>mechanism for WG members to be able to contact them in a transparent 
>way. FATT may (or may not) join the list voluntarily and likewise 
>may (or may not) respond to emails on the list voluntarily.

There was an explanation given for having the direct contact (re. 
draft-usama-tls-fatt-extension-05).  I would describe it as 
miscommunication.  That could be addressed by having direct 
communication.  A mailing list, with a public archive, would allow 
any interested party to see whether the engagement worked on 
not.  What if the member of the sub-group did not respond to the 
query which was sent to the mailing list?

It is not possible to come up with an appropriate alternative without 
the feedback of the sub-group.  That's the missing part here.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy