Re: [netmod] FW: Lisa's Apps area Activity Report for Jan 2009

["Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <[e-mail]>]

Acronyms clashes have already happened in the past in the IETF. Of
course, if they can be avoided it's better. If there was a published WG
document that already uses the YAM acronyms I could point it to the IESG
and IAB and try to prevent the clash using the prior usage argument.
However there is none that I am aware about in NETMOD. 
 
Dan
 
PS - this led me looking at the status of the documents in NETMOD and it
looks like you guys start accumulating delay relative to the charter
milestones - but the chairs and the rest of the WG probably know it and
are taking the appropriate measures - right? 


________________________________

	From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]]
On Behalf Of David Harrington
	Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 10:27 PM
	To: [e-mail]
	Subject: [netmod] FW: Lisa's Apps area Activity Report for Jan
2009
	
	
	Hi,
	 
	Thought I would point out that there is a YAM BOF being
consdiered for ietf74 (see
http://trac.tools.ietf.org/bof/trac/wiki/YamCharter)
	 
	If you want to call YANG models YAMs, you probably should move
to protect the acronym from other IETF usage. You will probably need to
demonstrate a WG consensus to adopt that term for YANG models.
	 
	Personally, i think anything based on "yet another" is likely to
continually hit conflicts. 
	I think for the users of yang models, who probably already have
experience in SMI MIBs, it will be apparent what a YANG MIB would be - a
management information base written using YANG. YMMV
	 
	dbh

________________________________

	From: [e-mail]
[mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Lisa Dusseault
	Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 1:45 PM
	To: Lisa Dusseault's Chairs; Apps Discuss
	Subject: Lisa's Apps area Activity Report for Jan 2009
	
	

	News, Updates
	Quite a few BOFs getting requested for the next meeting, see
http://trac.tools.ietf.org/bof/trac/wiki for more details on each:
	 - OAUTH - charter revised recently on list
	 - YAM, BOF on advancing core email standards
	 - MMOX, BOF on Massive Multiplayer Online Interactions
	 - XMPP, revising base specs and doing some transport and
security stuff
	 - Interest in other HTTP topics: Cookies, Origin header -- not
sure if there will be a BOF around this

	The BOF approval call is Feb 5 and scheduling of these BOFs will
happen after that.


	Document Status and Progress
	Active documents, my action:

	Active documents, waiting on other:
	 - draft-reschke-webdav-post (Exp): Cyrus Daboo is doing
shepherd review and writeup
	 - drat-montemurro-gsma-imei-urn (Exp): Waiting on revision from
authors
	 - draft-ietf-sieve-mime-loop (PS): Waiting on authors to
respond to GenArt review
	 - draft-ietf-usefor-usepro (PS): Waiting for last WG issue to
get resolved
	 - draft-ietf-calsify-2446bis (PS): Waiting for a revision
	 - draft-ietf-calsify-rfc2445bis (PS): Waiting for a revision
	 - draft-snell-atompub-bidi (PS): Waiting for a revision
	 - draft-wilde-sms-uri (PS): Waiting for a revision

	Finished processing -- new in RFC Ed queue and new RFCs
	 - draft-melnikov-sieve-imapext-metadata (PS): approved,
announcement sent
	 - draft-freed-sieve-ihave (PS): In RFC Ed queue
	 - draft-ietf-sieve-managesieve (PS): In RFC Ed queue
	 - draft-kucherawy-sender-auth-header (PS): In RFC Ed queue

	WG Status
	

	ALTO, HTTPBIS, IDNABIS and SIEVE are meeting in SF / IETF74

	ALTO: mostly quiet 
	CALSIFY: Working through open issues
	HTTPBIS: Interesting issues and great discussion on "Origin"
header or other fix/replacement to "Referer" header
	IDNABIS: Great discussion on goals and tradeoffs e.g. simplicity
and invariability of assignments
	SIEVE: Published several documents and pushing more through
	USEFOR: Prompted the WG last week to close their last one or two
issues, to finish their last doc
	--- Scanned by M+ Guardian Messaging Firewall --- Messaging
Architects sponsors The Spamhaus Project. 

_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod