Is there active maintenance being done on these documents in response to
the activity on the mailing list? Some of these documents look out of date.
Additionally, are list discussions being summarized?
Yakov
At 07:12 AM 7/8/2003 -0400, Paul Judge wrote:
I think that you hit on it with the understand, propose, and evaluate steps.
The use of three verbs was quite intentional.
Also, if you look at the ASRG Work Items list
(http://www.irtf.org/asrg/asrg-work-items.txt), you will notice that the
work items fall under these same three phases.
The understanding phase includes:
1. inventory of problems work
(http://www.irtf.org/asrg/draft-asrg-inventory-of-problems.txt)
2. the analysis and characterization work
The proposal phase includes:
Foundation:
3. requirements document
(https://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/asrg/current/msg05084.htm
l)
4. the taxonomy
(http://www.irtf.org/asrg/draft-asrg-taxonomy-anti-spam-systems.txt)
5. identification of standardization requirements
(http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-crocker-spam-techconsider-02.txt)
x. consent framework document
(http://www.solidmatrix.com/research/asrg/asrg-consent-framework.html)
Proposals:
6. proposals of new solutions (lots of these; they just need to be revisited
in relationship with the req's, the evaluation model, and the consent
framework) We probably need to create a template for proposals.
7. best practices documents.
The evaluation phase includes:
8.a. creating an evaluation model
(http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-crocker-spam-techconsider-02.txt)
8.c. evaluation of the solutions (it seems to be more efficient to require
this as part of proposals)
If anyone has opinions about items that should be added to or removed from
this list, I would love to hear them.
After we receive some feedback here, I will publish a new list of work
items.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yakov Shafranovich [mailto:research(_at_)solidmatrix(_dot_)com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2003 12:08 AM
> To: asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
> Subject: [Asrg] 0. General - Group Direction
>
>
> Our group was intended to do the following (from
> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/03mar/minutes/asrg.htm):
>
> "ASRG was formed to UNDERSTAND the problem and collectively
> PROPOSE and
> EVALUATE solutions to allow "consent based communication."
>
> However, while we had many discussions on UNDERSTANDING the
> spam problem,
> we have not produced a document or a summary of our results
> on that issue.
> But it seems that we are currently on our way towards PROPOSING AND
> EVALUATING solutions by first developing the following tools:
> 1. Consent framework. 2. Requirements document. 3. Technical
> Considerations document.
>
> Using these tools we can then look back at the various
> proposals and start
> evaluating them. As for UNDERSTANDING the problem can we hope
> to come up
> with a document summarizing the problem or is since there are so many
> divergent views, that will not happen?
>
> In general, is there a specific roadmap or direction for the
> group? Perhaps
> we are seeking to accomplish the following goals:
> 1. Write up a document summarizing the problem.
> 2. Write up documents to be used for evaluating proposals.
> 3. Start evaluating solutions based on the first two steps.
> 4. Select areas where standards are needed and either develop
> them or pass
> on the standardization suggestions to the IETF.
>
> Yakov
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Asrg mailing list
> Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg
>
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg