Revision of core Email specifications
charter-ietf-emailcore-01
Yes
Murray Kucherawy
Éric Vyncke
(Barry Leiba)
No Objection
Erik Kline
(Alissa Cooper)
(Alvaro Retana)
(Deborah Brungard)
(Magnus Westerlund)
(Martin Duke)
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 00-01 and is now closed.
Ballot question: "Do we approve of this charter?"
Murray Kucherawy
Yes
Warren Kumari
(was No Objection)
Yes
Comment
(2020-09-23 for -00-01)
Not sent
The charter says: "This working group will conduct a limited review and revision to the base email specifications, and will publish new versions of these documents at Internet Standard status, per RFC 6410." Which exactly are these "base email specifications"? Only RFC 5321 (protocol) and RFC 5322 (format)? What about e.g IMAP, Avian Carriers, etc (AKA, should we be more explicit in this paragrpah?)
Éric Vyncke
Yes
Erik Kline
No Objection
Roman Danyliw
No Objection
Comment
(2020-09-23 for -00-01)
Not sent
Like Rob Wilton said and I said earlier in the internal charter review, consider adding formal milestones.
Barry Leiba Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
(for -00-01)
Not sent
Alissa Cooper Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -00-01)
Not sent
Alvaro Retana Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -00-01)
Not sent
Benjamin Kaduk Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2020-09-23 for -00-01)
Sent
I thought we were supposed to have milestones already (sorry to pile on).
Also, I am not sure that "current email practices, including [...] other issues
from the UTA working group's output" parses properly ("practices"/"issues").
Deborah Brungard Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -00-01)
Not sent
Magnus Westerlund Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -00-01)
Not sent
Martin Duke Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -00-01)
Not sent
Robert Wilton Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2020-09-23 for -00-01)
Sent
Is this an appropriate time to add the formal milestones, or should that be done later?