Subject: [dbound] Minutes, milestones, and meeting

From: Casey Deccio <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2015 15:15:07 -0400

I've been reviewing the IETF93 DBOUND WG meeting minutes [1] in preparation
for the IETF 94 meeting.  Some thoughts follow.

There was discussion in the meeting about the subdivisions of the problem,
specifically identifying (or repudiating) relationships for names that are
ancestrally related (hierarchical relationships) vs. for those that are not
(cross-domain relationships).  There was agreement that both should be
addressed (confirmed with a hum in the room), but there was some sentiment
expressed that they might best be considered separately and that the
hierarchically related aspect should be considered first.  One of the
reasons for that was that was to avoid blocking solution of one problem by
waiting on a one-size-fits-all solution.

Among the actions from the last meeting were to revise some of the
questions fundamental to the problem statement, flesh out terminology in a
glossary, and develop revised milestones based on the WG discussions.
While there has been some discussion on the list directly or indirectly
addressing these, it seems to me that there is more work to be done.

Some of the "questions" are somewhat clear because they are based on
current application use, e.g., HTTP cookie allowed domains and
organizational domain identification for DMARC.  Others that are part of
the discussion are higher level, and while they might encompass the others,
there seems to be less agreement and more discussion.  I tend to think we
should focus on where there the most relevant usage and consensus.

The terminology glossary was begun (thanks, Kurt!) [2], though we have some
work yet to do by way of enumerating the terms whose definitions are useful
for defining and solving the problems.  The current list includes the
following:

Control:: (as in "Is domain X under the same control as domain Y")
Compatibility::
Complexity (implementation + operations)::
Portability:: Will this solution work for both offline as well as online
Scalability::

I'm somewhat concerned about spending cycles defining "control".  The
others were terms associated with solution considerations for rating their
effectiveness.  Also, other terms might need to be added, if they are
helpful to the problem.

For the "milestones", I would propose that we add different milestones for
the different subdivisions of the problem.  This doesn't tie us to multiple
solutions, but it does allow it, and it also allows prioritized
consideration of the subdivisions of the problem.

I have authored a draft with the intent of embodying some of the principles
of the problem.  The draft addresses the "hierarchical" aspect of the
DBOUND problem and focuses on current application use.  It also includes
the considerations for solutions (e.g., compatibility, portability).  The
draft is here:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-deccio-dbound-organizational-domain-policy/

If you haven't already read it, I ask that you give it a read and provide
feedback.

For the IETF 94 meeting, I propose to take some WG time to present and
discuss this draft.  As a preface to discussion of this draft, I think it
would be valuable to recap and have some follow-up on the key discussion
points from the last meeting (e.g., those pointed out above).  That would
present a natural segue into the draft presentation/discussion.  I am happy
to lead that discussion as well as present the draft, though I have
constraints that prevent me from attending this meeting in person.  I am
asking the chairs to acquire the means for remote presentation, which might
at least enable presentation of the draft.

Cheers,
Casey

[1] https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/93/minutes/minutes-93-dbound
[2] http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/dbound/trac/wiki/Glossary