URI WG direction and status
John C Klensin <klensin@mail1.reston.mci.net> Thu, 20 July 1995 21:48 UTC
Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa13931; 20 Jul 95 17:48 EDT
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa13927; 20 Jul 95 17:48 EDT
Received: from services.Bunyip.COM by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa20265; 20 Jul 95 17:48 EDT
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by services.bunyip.com (8.6.10/8.6.9) id MAA12988 for uri-out; Thu, 20 Jul 1995 12:01:09 -0400
Received: from mocha.bunyip.com (mocha.Bunyip.Com [192.197.208.1]) by services.bunyip.com (8.6.10/8.6.9) with SMTP id MAA12974 for <uri@services.bunyip.com>; Thu, 20 Jul 1995 12:01:02 -0400
Received: from mail1.Reston.mci.net by mocha.bunyip.com with SMTP (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2b/CC-Guru-2b) id AA20722 (mail destined for uri@services.bunyip.com); Thu, 20 Jul 95 12:00:57 -0400
Received: from mail1.reston.mci.net (tp156.ietf33.nordu.net) by MAIL1.RESTON.MCI.NET (PMDF V5.0-3 #8388) id <01HT3C7EFOF4000A90@MAIL1.RESTON.MCI.NET>; Thu, 20 Jul 1995 12:00:15 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 1995 11:59:33 -0400
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: John C Klensin <klensin@mail1.reston.mci.net>
Subject: URI WG direction and status
X-Sender: klensin@mail1.reston.mci.net
To: uri@bunyip.com
Cc: Harald Alvestrand <Harald.T.Alvestrand@uninett.no>, jkrey@isi.edu
Message-Id: <01HT3C7EWMQA000A90@MAIL1.RESTON.MCI.NET>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 2.1.1b7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Orig-Sender: owner-uri@bunyip.com
Precedence: bulk
As most of you have presumably heard by now, we are shutting down the URI WG, effective immediately. That leaves a few loose ends whose status is summarized in this note. (1) draft-ietf-uri-url-finger-02.txt Our (the ADs) impression is that this document has not received adequate review, but is basically sound. A poll taken in Stockholm indicated too few people who had studied the document and the related Finger materials to do the review on the spot. Rather than keep the WG open and hope that adequate review occurs, we are soliciting volunteers to form an ad hoc review committee on this document. Volunteers, who are willing to study the current finger Draft Standard (RFC-1288), the current draft of its proposed replacement (draft-zimmerman-finger-03.txt) and the finger URL proposal and write short reviews for the ADs in the next two weeks should contact Harald and myself. (2) draft-ietf-uri-mailserv-02.txt The situation on this is similar to that of the above. Readers who have studied the existing major mail RFCs (821, 822, relevant sections of 1123, and who understand the commands and relative behavior of at least a couple of major mail-based servers and who are willing to do a careful review of this document in the next few weeks should contact Harald and myself. (3) Review of RFC 1738 (the Proposed Standard URL definition document) and preparation and review of a Draft Standard version. We hope to get most or all of this work done without convening a WG. Volunteers to do editing work, or those with strong opinions about whether a WG -- with this task alone -- is needed, should contact Harald and myself. (4) Over the next several weeks, we expect to see proposals for several new working groups with narrow and focused charters. It is our intention to post drafts of those charters to this list in order to obtain comments about areas of overlap, gaps, realism of schedules, etc. Finally, in the heat and tensions of today's discussions, I came down on Larry much harder than was necessary or appropriate under the circumstances. I've apologized to him personally, and want to repeat that apology for the list. john v
- URI WG direction and status John C Klensin