Martin,
I think OCP/SMTP is the next logical direction.
--
Hector Santos, Santronics Software, Inc.
http://www.santronics.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Martin Stecher" <martin(_dot_)stecher(_at_)webwasher(_dot_)com>
To: "Clemens Perz" <cperz(_at_)allaboutit(_dot_)lu>; "OPES Group"
<ietf-openproxy(_at_)imc(_dot_)org>
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2005 3:48 PM
Subject: RE: Moving Forward
Hi Clemens,
every active participant is more than welcome.
I also appreciate your positive view, maybe I got too pessimistic recently.
If the group agrees that we should continue with our current milestones, I
am happy to work with you on the OCP/SMTP draft, hoping that Alex will at
least be available to discuss some OCP details, better as co-author.
So, what are the others thinking about OCP/SMTP? Should we do this - now?
Regards
Martin
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: owner-ietf-openproxy(_at_)mail(_dot_)imc(_dot_)org im Auftrag von Clemens
Perz
Gesendet: Do 11.08.2005 04:26
An: OPES Group
Cc:
Betreff: Re: Moving Forward
Hi,
If you are willing to consider the contribution of a complete greenhorn to
this Working Group, I would like to work with Martin on the OCP/SMTP draft.
I'm not sure if it needs to be on the Charter for that, but it should not
be forgotten in any way.
My experience is that the people who could benefit from such a standard do
not know about the OPES Working Group and the potential it's work creates.
While the SMTP threats grow and the search for more flexible infrastructure
solutions becomes more hectic, it would be nice to have the phoenix ready
in the fire :)
The relevance of the OCP/SMTP might be underestimated by us and the
markets, because many people do not take their time yet to get the whole
picture. Offering a flexible protocol solution could change that very
quickly.
Cheers,
Clemens
--On Mittwoch, 10. August 2005 20:16 -0400 Markus Hofmann
<markus(_at_)mhof(_dot_)com>
wrote:
Martin,
so what would you propose is the next step after removing OCP/SMTP from
the charter?
All - everyone in agreement with Martin, or does somebody see a
need/interest for OCP/SMTP?
Thanks,
Markus
Martin Stecher wrote:
Hi,
I am available for OPES protocol work and willing to act as a co-author
for OCP profile drafts.
But I am not convinced that OCP/SMTP is the next step. As there seems
to be no other interest in this we should indeed have the open SMTP
milestones to be removed from the charter, for now, IMO.
There is no current OCP/SMTP demand by the industry today.
In principle I believe that OCP has the ability to act as an universal
protocol agnostig callout protocol and that OCP/SMTP can and should be
done at some time.
But with the limited resources we have in this group today we must focus
on those adaptations that are of immediate need and use for someone.
There we can proof that OCP is a powerful, application agnostic protocol
with useful and needed protocol profiles.
Only then we can get to first implementations that may then hopefully
cut the Gordian knot we are facing today.
And after that we may be asked to return to OCP/SMTP.
Regards
Martin