IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [sasl] MOGGIES Proposed Charter<

Jeffrey Hutzelman <jhutz@cmu.edu> Wed, 26 May 2010 00:43 UTC

Return-Path: <jhutz@cmu.edu>
X-Original-To: sasl@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sasl@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CD5F3A6AA6; Tue, 25 May 2010 17:43:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WOUhH0xetEVn; Tue, 25 May 2010 17:43:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp02.srv.cs.cmu.edu (SMTP02.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.217.197]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 938B63A6F26; Tue, 25 May 2010 16:43:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 174-146-39-7.pools.spcsdns.net (174-146-39-7.pools.spcsdns.net [174.146.39.7]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp02.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id o4PNgrw0020336 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 25 May 2010 19:42:55 -0400 (EDT)
X-User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Jeffrey Hutzelman <jhutz@cmu.edu>
Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 19:42:51 -0400
To: Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>, mrex@sap.com
Message-ID: <783ac363-66a1-442d-9ffb-1f92792cf5e9@email.android.com>
X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.217.197
Cc: kitten@ietf.org, simon@josefsson.org, sasl@ietf.org, tim.polk@nist.gov
Subject: Re: [sasl] MOGGIES Proposed Charter<
X-BeenThere: sasl@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: SASL Working Group <sasl.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sasl>, <mailto:sasl-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sasl>
List-Post: <mailto:sasl@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sasl-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sasl>, <mailto:sasl-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 00:43:46 -0000

"Sam Hartman" <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu> wrote:

>>>>>> "Martin" == Martin Rex <mrex@sap.com> writes:
>
>
>I join Martin.  I think that closing sasl and rechartering is disruptive
>enough.  I don't think it makes sense to change the name of two WGs.  I
>definitely don't think that it makes sense to change to a new mailing
>list instead of one of the existing mailing lists.  I don't think the
>new name or a desire to have a new name is sufficiently compelling to
>change the mailing list.
>
>so:
>
>1) I strongly object to the new wg using a mailing list other than
>kitten@ietf.org the old SASL list.
>2) I don't think it wise for the new WG to have a name that disagrees
>with its mailing list.
>
>As a result I fairly strongly believe the WG should be called kitten or
>SASL.

I agree; I was wondering why we weren't just rechartering one group to absorb the other.  I suggest having kitten absorb sasl, so we don't end up with a wg acronym that's only one of our protocols.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email