Re: Latest Charter Proposal

Markus,

	I have only one important correction and two minor questions:

Correction: Please replace
	"operating on SMTP messages" with
	"adapting SMTP"
and
	"forward SMTP messages (or parts thereof)" with
	"forward SMTP data and metadata".
This change should capture everything we might need to adapt.

I think Martin gave us enough use cases to at least include SMTP
command adaptation in the charter, but I am not sure we will end up
adapting commands themselves and not SMTP state. Martin's examples
seem to indicate that we are talking about some processing state
adaptation.


Question1: Should "OCP/SMTP profile for X" in deadlines be replaced
with something like "SMTP adaptation for X with OPES"? Since those
drafts will include tracing/bypass profile as well as OCP profile, it
seems wrong to call them just "OCP/SMTP profile". We called HTTP draft
"HTTP adaptation with OPES" for that reason...

Question2: Should APR05 deadline have something like "to IESG as
Proposed Standard(s)"?

Thanks,

Alex.

On Thu, 15 Jul 2004, Markus Hofmann wrote:

> In a next step, the WG will specify one or more OCP profiles that will
> support OPES services operating on SMTP messages. ...
> and forward SMTP messages (or parts thereof) to a callout server for
> additional processing. ...
> ...
> - Develop a scenarios and use case document for OPES
>    services operating on SMTP messages.
> ...
> OCT04   Submit use cases document for OPES services
>          operating on SMTP messages to IESG for
>          Informational.
> DEC04   Initial document on OCP/SMTP profile for MTAs.
> FEB05   Submit document on OCP/SMTP profile for MTAs to
>          IESG for Proposed Standard.
> APR05   Submit document(s) on OCP/SMTP profile(s) for those
>          other SMTP agents the WG has decided to work on, if
>          any.