I think it would be good to be explicit that this is a standards track
WG.
If it is not a standards track WG I don't see the point.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ietf-mailsig(_at_)mail(_dot_)imc(_dot_)org
[mailto:owner-ietf-mailsig(_at_)mail(_dot_)imc(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Dave
Crocker
Sent: Sunday, July 17, 2005 3:01 PM
To: IETF MASS WG
Subject: Re: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter
First, is the intent of this WG to create standard
track RFCs? I
believe the MARID WG was chartered to do so.
The draft charter specifies the goals of the working group.
Uh, yeah, but I don't think that answers my question.
This BOF seeks to initiate the MASS working group, to produce
specifications that permit authentication of message
headers during transit,
...
2/06 Submit to IESG - MASS signature specification
The charter does not state "standards track" explicitly.
That's because the
focus is on the technical work, rather than the status label.
I didn't realize your focus was on the label, but thought
that you were asking
about the content of the working group's output.
d/
---
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
+1.408.246.8253
dcrocker a t ...
WE'VE MOVED to: www.bbiw.net