RE: [Off Topic] Need review for POP3 extension mechanism

I will take a look at this document.  Maybe it was just me, but I do not
recall having seen the last call announcement....

Greg V.

> ----------
> From: 	Keith Moore[SMTP:[email protected]]
> Reply To: 	[email protected]
> Sent: 	Wednesday, July 08, 1998 8:30 PM
> To: 	[email protected]; [email protected]
> Cc: 	[email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: 	[Off Topic] Need review for POP3 extension mechanism
> 
> I apologize for an off-topic posting.  
> Please send replies to [email protected], not to the drums or ietf-smtp
> lists.
> 
> On May 18, a Last Call was issued on for document
> draft-gellens-pop3ext-05.txt ,
> for Proposed Standard status.  Nobody has commented on the document.  I am
> 
> reluctant to recommend that IESG approve this document without more
> evidence 
> of support.
> 
> So I'm asking for more review...
> 
> Should the document be adopted as is?  Does it need more wordsmithing?
> Are all of these capabilities needed?
> Are all of the capabilities defined with sufficient precision?
> 
> Should the document be standards track or should it be Informational or 
> Experimental?
> 
> Should the extension mechanism be separated from (and perhaps a different 
> status from) the extensions themselves?
> 
> If the document is approved for Proposed, should all of the proposed
> extensions 
> be included?  Or should some of the extensions be moved to a separate 
> Informational or Experimental?   Which ones?
> 
> In the absence of more community input, my recommendation would be to
> direct
> the authors to remove all of the capabilities from this document, except
> those 
> which are already defined in standards-track documents.  Additional
> capabilities 
> could be defined in a separate experimental or informational RFC.
> 
> thanks!
> 
> Keith Moore
> APPS co-AD
>