ietf-mxcomp
[Top] [All Lists]

Working Group Last Call on Sender ID documents

2004-08-23 07:53:07

Today begins a 2 week working group last call for the following documents:
  draft-ietf-marid-core-03.txt
  draft-ietf-marid-submitter-03.txt
  draft-ietf-marid-protocol-02
  draft-ietf-marid-pra-00.txt

To better facilitate discourse, we ask all working group participants to abide by the following parameters:

1) Messages concerning this last call should fall into one of four categories: document bugs, technical errors, technical omissions, or implementation and deployment issues. Each subject line must be prefaced with a designation stating the category into which it falls. These designations are "DOC-BUG", "TECH-ERROR", "TECH-OMISSION", and "DEPLOY".

e.g.,

  Subject:  DOC-BUG: typos in -core

The co-chairs will not take into consideration messages that do not meet these criteria. Here are the descriptions of the categories:


DOC-BUG: Document bugs relate to simple errors within the document, such as typos, bad ABNF, etc... All messages in this category should be subject prefaced with "DOC-BUG". The author of the message should note the document bug and provide corrective text.


TECH-ERROR: Technical errors are misuses of technical mechanisms specified in the document. All messages in this category should be subject prefaced with "TECH-ERROR". The author of the message should note the technical error and supply a fix if possible.


TECH-OMISSION: Technical omissions are issues surrounding lack of needed functionality. An example would be failure to guard against replay attacks when using cryptographic hashes, etc... All messages in this category should be subject prefaced with "TECH-OMISSION". The author of the message should clearly note 1) the goal of the mechanism lacking the necessary feature, 2) the purpose of the necessary feature, and 3) a suggested fix to include such a feature while still adhering to the stated gaol of 1.


DEPLOY: Implementation and deployment issues relate to both technical and non-technical barriers for the implementation and deployment of the specifications described in these documents. All messages in this category should be subject prefaced with "DEPLOY". The author of the message should clearly state why he/she will personally not be able to implement or deploy a specification. The author of the message should not speak on behalf of others. Inclusion of citations supporting a position will also be helpful: for technical concerns these should be citations to research or studies, for IPR concerns these should be citations to legal filings.



2) Discussions of the validity for the need of any MARID solution or the need for a MARID working group are not appropriate at this time. While these opinions may be valid, they should be discussed with the IESG as an appeal for chartering this working group. It is now the job of this working group to finish the work under its charter and not debate the validity of the charter.

-MARID Co-chairs


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>