Re: Last Call: draft-siemborski-rfc1734bis (POP3 SASL Authentication Mechanism) to Proposed Standard
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Last Call: draft-siemborski-rfc1734bis (POP3 SASL Authentication Mechanism) to Proposed Standard



I have reviewed this document and support moving it forward on the standards track.

On procedural nit:

In section 4, the document states:
         The service name specified by this protocol's profile of SASL
         is "pop".

A note in the IANA Considerations section is needed which directs IANA to update the GSSAPI/SASL service name registry to reference this document. The service name registry is located here:

 <http://www.iana.org/assignments/gssapi-service-names>

               - Chris

The IESG wrote on 1/24/07 16:29 -0500:

The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider
the following document:

- 'POP3 SASL Authentication Mechanism '
   <draft-siemborski-rfc1734bis-10.txt> as a Proposed Standard

The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action.  Please send substantive comments to the
ietf at ietf.org mailing lists by 2007-02-21. Exceptionally,
comments may be sent to iesg at ietf.org instead. In either case, please
retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.

The file can be obtained via
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-siemborski-rfc1734bis-10.txt


IESG discussion can be tracked via https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=view_id&dTag=10914 &rfc_flag=0


_______________________________________________ IETF-Announce mailing list IETF-Announce at ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce






_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf at ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf




Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.

Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.