Re: [apps-discuss] draft-santos-smtpgrey-02: SMTP Service Extension for Greylisting Operations

[Claudio Allocchio <[e-mail]>]

Let me add a little detail to the discussion:

if you check the statistics of the Apps WG list and see what's proposed on 
it, you will notice that practially all "SMTP related" stuff ends up here. 
There is a valid reason for this, whichi is:

  - there is no (and there is no need for a specific) SMTP 
updates/maintenance WG in the IETF;

  - most of the people interested in the topic are actually on Apps WG 
itself.

The real problem is manpower to follow up the drafts after people gives 
enough +1s to adopt them. As we are chartered quite openly (and this is ok 
for THIS WG) and of course are a mix of all Apps Area expertises, of 
course I do not presume that 60% of WG people stand up and work an any 
specific draft, just because it does not fit their own expertise area: I'd 
not stand up for an XML draft for actual work, just because I do not feel 
I'm the righ person to do that for example, but I'll put my +1 on XML 
drafts I believe are worth... and the expect the XML experts to 
contribute. Given this personal humble assumption, I'm not saying that we 
should formally "wheight" the +1s according the people's expertise area, 
but at least to think about this when we take adotion decisions.

Again, the mail problem to face, not only in the specifi Apps WG, is the 
actual manpower avilable... I've the unpleaseant feeling, also 
coordinating the AppsDir, that it is decreasing because of various 
reasons.

my little 2 cents...

all the best

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Claudio Allocchio             G   A   R   R          [e-mail]
                         Senior Technical Officer
tel: [phone]      Italian Academic and       G=Claudio; S=Allocchio;
fax: [phone]        Research Network         P=garr; A=garr; C=it;

            PGP Key: http://www.cert.garr.it/PGP/keys.php3#ca