Re: [apps-discuss] Review of draft-ietf-appsawg-file-scheme

"Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com> Tue, 12 April 2016 23:21 UTC

Return-Path: <superuser@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 645B212E38E; Tue, 12 Apr 2016 16:21:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dhFKWisDfAoO; Tue, 12 Apr 2016 16:21:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vk0-x22d.google.com (mail-vk0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c05::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F082C12E070; Tue, 12 Apr 2016 16:21:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vk0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id c4so46566948vkb.3; Tue, 12 Apr 2016 16:21:33 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc; bh=1qx3tUB1joFSrc3LqldySyr+5YqKAHBOOpGhgfvybao=; b=uMroRhYIU8A0T+OoIGRfO/lbZFgfzdGOlH5lrd4FW9FPw7k/kfZ2a/xCBW4lz06EBS h01NkISQdEfRLBJuqAVtE/8yvlXR5r4nfrSU7vISOYW6clym4uZnpY+Ml0tFYKdcOHtD qEbXqBXHMvWF82NPDwZiiySz1RR854Lw7Y3JfTYMEZwk3uHtgXP1oeJZQ/nGK+2P5K+5 dvO8t1WFe6tgmc8s7fpjg76VzS/dCqTQh+XdxphgZNistSMJswLHdc7C4BjOXanT1IDj AbQKBUjySCY6F6FMF1kKWC8rbnsWCGWZ5p7s9teu7I5aNTDILrmVLYuGL11zIpTcSdh/ 1QfA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=1qx3tUB1joFSrc3LqldySyr+5YqKAHBOOpGhgfvybao=; b=e3FtIxWwZGs/joOGL2FfCh79dF7w1k+vnY5fMBXDT92lVQTrB51w+b13nzmI63uipL 17fupEs4wvUAviHGdkIZufKjxijIGFnEYLwFRTvYrNtDI3c6u1To9ikxGF6wWIC2DmSl enQD0wgomIMPF/bD1Vg5Ruc25HnyJTSkzHnTsQwZU3bLCnTLKTGxE8dZ3ag+kFLrMX+F d5Im2FHfOFp0eXINPn+HUccM9orIcm1urOQe/2hJ6MhXZDs8MceXUSM2F1J/dliKjmcm nTL1gMVOr209S9/9trLsisdLQQYqUB+rGqHXcfx5mSWAvu1bEq7hrMOOSrHkK5zbwCmb nNjg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FUXFWA1TvHdJUIFQ52hJBE7nBoRtStoCdjcIEjwyWLLwAvDba0MZQr3xxRoTCw9Kr6U75MsnMdRA+TbSA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.31.52.147 with SMTP id b141mr3085494vka.82.1460503293013; Tue, 12 Apr 2016 16:21:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.103.43.5 with HTTP; Tue, 12 Apr 2016 16:21:32 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <570D4C99.1030405@dcrocker.net>
References: <570D4C99.1030405@dcrocker.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2016 20:21:32 -0300
Message-ID: <CAL0qLwbtYUDWYc1Q4Vn-6hLct7Rf-XgAOvV7WBj4pk+Th7Cd=Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
To: Dave Crocker <dcrocker@bbiw.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1143f846f93674053051eb94
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/apps-discuss/byP0nNq-DfV5wzkIF72aEPbNDO4>
Cc: art-ads@ietf.org, Apps Discuss <apps-discuss@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-appsawg-file-scheme@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Review of draft-ietf-appsawg-file-scheme
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/apps-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2016 23:21:35 -0000

On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 4:29 PM, Dave Crocker <dhc2@dcrocker.net> wrote:

> [...]
> In technical terms, document seems to suffer some confusion about its role
> as a format specification, versus as a protocol specification.  I believe
> this issue is basic and important.  It needs to be resolved.
>
> For a specification involving such a potentially and presumably important
> capability, I think significant community support should be required...
> unless the spec is to be offered as Experimental, which is the most I'm
> inclined to recommend at this point...
>

Thanks, Dave.  I've consulted with our ADs and they're fine with keeping
APPSAWG open to process this document so long as we see continued work on
its development.  If it goes stale again for too long, we'll likely shut
down without completing this final milestone and pass the document over to
DISPATCH for disposition under their handling model.  If we're sure we want
Standards Track, that will mean sponsorship by an AD, or a (likely
small/short) working group to finish it off.

Matthew, do you have the time to put into closing this out?

-MSK