Re: [ftpext] Followup on FTPEXT2 BOF in Maastricht

[Alexey Melnikov <[e-mail]>]

Hi Anthony,

Anthony Bryan wrote:

>On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 4:05 AM, Alexey Melnikov
><[e-mail]> wrote:
>  
>
>>2). Propose and agree on WG charter on the mailing list.    
>>
>
>thanks, Alexey. I agree we need more participants, and I will continue
>to invite relevant people.
>
>I've never worked on an IETF charter, but here's what I had, borrowing
>from other charters and the BOF proposal.
>
Thanks for proposing an initial version. Some quick feedback with my 
Area Director hat on.

>because of the maturity of HOST, I would say it deserves an
>accelerated schedule.
>
>FTP Extensions, 2nd edition (ftpext2) Charter
>
>Description of Working Group:
>
>The Standard File Transfer Protocol specification in RFC 959
>has been updated several times with command extensions of one
>sort or another, including those based on the extension
>mechanism of RFCs 2389 (a complete list appears in RFC 5797 and
>the corresponding IANA registry at
>http://www.iana.org/assignments/ftp-commands-extensions/ftp-commands-extensions.xhtml
>).
>
>The following are active FTP related drafts:
>
>    draft-bryan-ftp-hash
>    draft-hethmon-mcmurray-ftp-hosts (completed IETF Last Call in May)
>    draft-ietf-behave-ftp64
>    draft-preston-ftpext-deflate
>
>The Working Group will:
>* Review and finalize already mature drafts that are close to
>  completion.
>* Continue work on other drafts that are already in progress.
>* Identify additional areas of FTP that need extending, such as
>  unofficial FTP commands that need documentation or new commands.
>  
>
In general IESG doesn't like openended charters ("we will work on 
anything that has FTP in its name"). It is much better to have a 
specific set of deliverables (especially for a new WG, with no prior 
history of successful completion of any work), and recharter later to 
take on additional documents. Rechartering is a much easier process, 
especially if a WG has some proof that it is making progress.

>* Review and confirm or reject errata of current FTP RFCs.
>  
>
This one is fine. I actually like that.

>* Discuss the differences between FTP in theory (current RFCs)
>  and practice.
>
This sounds a bit openended as well. Is this item trying to motivate 
future work? So maybe "Investigate the differences between FTP in theory 
(current RFCs) and practice, and recommend future work to align them"?

>The Working Group's specification deliverables are:
>* A document that specifies the HOST command (Proposed Standard).
>* A document that specifies the HASH command (Proposed Standard).
>
>The Working Group must not introduce a new version of FTP, e.g.
>an incompatible FTP 2.0.
>
>The following issues are specifically omitted from the working group's
>charter, but may be added by the Area Directors if time permits,
>once the above goals have been acheived.
>
Area Directors typically don't do that. I can provide more feedback (for 
example if you list too many documents), but it is ultimately up to the 
group to decide what to work on and in which order.

>* A document on "FTP in the 21st Century" that gives
>implementation advice on FTP in the wild. (Informational or BCP)
>
>
>Goals and Milestones
>Sep 2010    Submit 'File Transfer Protocol HOST Command for Virtual
>Hosts' as working group item (draft-hethmon-mcmurray-ftp-hosts will be
>used as a starting point)
>Sep 2010    Submit 'File Transfer Protocol HASH Command for
>Cryptographic Hashes' as working group item (draft-bryan-ftp-hash will
>be used as a starting point)
>XXX 2010    Working group Last Call of HOST document
>XXX 2010    Submit 'File Transfer Protocol HOST Command for Virtual
>Hosts' to the IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard
>XXX 2010    Working group Last Call of HASH document
>XXX 2010    Submit 'File Transfer Protocol HASH Command for
>Cryptographic Hashes' to the IESG for consideration as a Proposed
>Standard
>XXX 2011    Identify other areas of FTP that need extending, or
>unofficial commands that need documenting
>XXX 2011    Close or recharter
>