On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Markus Hofmann wrote:
jfcm wrote:
I am disturbed by the imbalance. First was developped a profile
for HTTP (a protocol), now we want to support applications (not a
protocol) using messages transported by a protocol.
So far, we've specified a OCP/HTTP profile that supports services
operating on HTTP messages.
Now we specify a OCP/SMTP profile that supports services operating
on SMTP messages.
I would assume this becomes clear from the proposed charter.
Markus,
Jfc seems to re-visit, perhaps unknowingly, a very important
charter-related question that we must finish discussing. Please see
http://www.imc.org/ietf-openproxy/mail-archive/msg02979.html
for the start of the thread. In
http://www.imc.org/ietf-openproxy/mail-archive/msg02982.html
you said "Similar to what we did in the first charter, we can make
SMTP the prime goal which we'll have to provide a solution for, but we
can first explore the feasibility of a general "email/MIME" profile
(and maybe include an explicit charter item for such exploration)."
The above direction was supported by Abbie and myself, without
objections. Can we go down that path and include an exploratory
charter item instead of starting with SMTP? It may also simplify
solving the agent-dependency problem for SMTP. We can be more vague
about SMTP if we have to do MIME first!
I apologize for not recalling that two-week old e-mail thread earlier.
Thanks,
Alex.