Re: A suggestion

On Thu, Oct 30, 2003 at 07:17:02PM -0500, Yakov Shafranovich wrote:
| 
| 1. Take all of the technical aspects of the protocol into a single 
| combined document of the ASRG. Alan will be the editor, with everyone 
| else as authors. Don't forget to mention Paul Vixie's draft.
| 2. Provide a separate document addressing issues with RMX-type 
| proposals, including all of the issues raised on the main list. Such 
| separation would be very conducive.

I agree with the above two suggestions; see RFC2026 sections 3.1 and 3.2.

| 3. Rename the protocols as something else. My suggestion is "Lightweight 
| Email Authentication Protocol" which comes to a nice acronym of LEAP.

Something which isn't already "taken" might be good.
Apparently leap.sourceforge.net is some sort of SQL thing.
Whether we can get the .org might be another consideration.
Anyway, this is a minor point.

| I think that at this point a combined and renamed proposal edited by a 
| non-author would address most of competive issues in the group. 

>From the start I have said I am not interested in seeing my name on an
RFC; my priority is to see a lot of people using the solution.  I
evaluate features on the basis of adoption appeal and ease of
implementation for the masses.

| Additionally, many of the technical issues have been already resolved - 
| it is the other issues such as scalability, forwarders, etc. that need 
| to be addressed. That is why I am suggestion two documents - one for the 
| protocol itself and another for issues with the protocol.
| 
| The second document should preferably follow the seventeen points in the 
| technical considerations document and the issues in the requirements 
| document.

I would be happy to start drafting an Applicability Statement, but I
will await a go-ahead from Alan before I do.