SMTP draft Issues

DRUMS WG Chair <chris.newman@innosoft.com> Sat, 29 July 2000 00:10 UTC

Received: from cs.utk.edu (CS.UTK.EDU [128.169.94.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA00573 for <drums-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 20:10:45 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by cs.utk.edu with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id UAA00541; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 20:09:54 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by cs.utk.edu (bulk_mailer v1.13); Fri, 28 Jul 2000 20:09:53 -0400
Received: by cs.utk.edu (cf v2.9s-UTK) id UAA00524; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 20:09:52 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mercury.Sun.COM (marvin@localhost) by cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id UAA00511; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 20:09:40 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mercury.Sun.COM (192.9.25.1 -> mercury.Sun.COM) by cs.utk.edu (smtpshim v1.0); Fri, 28 Jul 2000 20:09:41 -0400
Received: from westmail2.West.Sun.COM ([129.153.100.30]) by mercury.Sun.COM (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA08025 for <drums@cs.utk.edu>; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 17:09:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nifty-jr.west.sun.com (nifty-jr.West.Sun.COM [129.153.12.95]) by westmail2.West.Sun.COM (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3/ENSMAIL, v1.7) with ESMTP id RAA12737 for <drums@cs.utk.edu>; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 17:09:36 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 17:08:58 -0700
From: DRUMS WG Chair <chris.newman@innosoft.com>
To: "Detailed Revision/Update of Message Standards" <drums@cs.utk.edu>
Subject: SMTP draft Issues
Message-ID: <2423275.3173792938@nifty-jr.west.sun.com>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.0.3 (MacOS)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:drums-request@cs.utk.edu?Subject=unsubscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

"suggested revision for MUST/SHOULD"
	Debate Open, proposal for rough concensus pending

"Conflict between X.1.9(iv) and literal interpretation of draft-12"
	Debate Closed, only 2 explicit supporters of proposed text

"2nd suggested revision for MUST/SHOULD"
	(replacement language for "fully conforming")
	Debate Closed, only 3 explicit supporters of proposed text

These are the only issues I'm currently tracking.  If you want some other 
issue to be considered, please start a new subject and include proposed 
changes to the text in the SMTP draft.

Please don't debate an issue until we have at least 4 posts expressing 
support (including the original proposer).  This work is so overdue that 
I'm experimenting with somewhat heavy-handed procedures to avoid 
unnecessary debate and simplify issue tracking.  Feel free to send comments 
on procedural issues to me privately.

		- DRUMS WG Chair