OK
Thanks
Roni
-----Original Message-----
From: Tony Hansen [mailto:tony(_at_)att(_dot_)com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2010 3:29 PM
To: Roni Even
Cc: dcrocker(_at_)bbiw(_dot_)net; 'General Area Review Team'; draft-ietf-yam-
5321bis-smtp-pre-evaluation(_dot_)all(_at_)tools(_dot_)ietf(_dot_)org;
ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-yam-5321bis-smtp-pre-
evaluation-05
The IESG members I know are quite familiar with the requirements of
2026
and are expecting a deployment analysis for going to full standard, but
not a repeat of the interoperability analysis that was already done
years ago.
Tony Hansen
YAM WG co-chair
On 5/18/2010 2:37 AM, Roni Even wrote:
Hi,
I am not the expert on the requirements and it will be up to the
IESG. I
think that when you go to full standard you need to take out any
commands
and tags that are not used by interoperable products. If that was
done
previously than it is OK but I suggest that you mention it to the
IESG.
Roni Even
-----Original Message-----
From: Dave CROCKER [mailto:dhc2(_at_)dcrocker(_dot_)net]
Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2010 12:47 AM
To: Roni Even
Cc: 'General Area Review Team'; draft-ietf-yam-5321bis-smtp-pre-
evaluation(_dot_)all(_at_)tools(_dot_)ietf(_dot_)org;
ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-yam-5321bis-smtp-pre-
evaluation-05
On 5/17/2010 12:07 PM, Roni Even wrote:
In general it looks good, what I did not see is a summary of an
analysis
that evaluate if all commands and tags are used in interoperable
products
That's correct. The working group has been diligent in restricting
its
work to
the chartered scope, namely satisfying only requirements for full
Internet Standard.
I believe your comment is, instead, applicable for Draft. RFC 5321
satisifed
that quite a long time ago, since it is already at Draft status.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf