--On March 2, 2015 23:45:40 +0000 "Orit Levin (LCA)" <[email protected]>
wrote:
> During the last meeting, I expressed my opinion (as an individual, not as a
> chair) that it would be reasonable to split the draft into two:
> 1. A "best current practices for e-mail" document expanding the tls-bcp
document
> and based on existing protocols and mechanisms.
imaps and pop3s are not existing standards, so if we're recommending those
protocols we need a standards track document to define them. I think we should
recommend those protocols. As we need a standards track document anyway, I'd
prefer we keep the content together to make it easier on implementers/readers.
> 2. A separate "proposed standard" document defining new mechanisms in order to
> improve email security, etc.
> These correspond to definitions in sections 5, 6, 7, the related procedures
> throughout the document, and the IANA Considerations.
If the WG has rough consensus that sections 5, 6, and 7 are not proposed
standard quality, I will follow WG direction and delete those sections from the
document. However, if that happens I will not volunteer to edit a separate
document containing those sections. So unless someone else volunteers to edit
that, the decision is about "deletion" not about "splitting". So I'll ask you
the question: are you proposing deletion of sections 5, 6 and 7 as not suitable
for proposed standard? If so, please state the technical reasons you believe
they are not suitable or something actionable that would convince you they are
suitable.
Thanks,
- Chris
> There was no time for this discussion at the meeting, so we agreed to move it
> to the list. I would like to know what people think about this direction.
> Thanks,
> Orit.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Uta mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta
>
_______________________________________________
Uta mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta
