Re: URI Draft

[Steve Suehring <suehring at braingia.org>]

Thanks for the feedback Tom.  I've sent a revised draft to Joe for 
his feedback.  After that we'll submit it as appropriate here.

Steve

On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 12:44:12PM +0200, tom.petch wrote:
> <tp>
> inline
> </tp>
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Joseph Salowey (jsalowey)" <jsalowey at cisco.com>
> Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 6:22 AM
> Subject: RE: URI Draft
> 
> Hi Steve,
> 
> Good to hear from you.   The basic steps would probably be to
> 
> 1) Submit a new draft revision
> 2) Ask for a review on the SSH list
> 3) Ask for a review on the URI list
> 4) request publication as an individual submission
> 
> For 1), I think we need to decided if we still want to keep SFTP and SCP
> in the same draft.  It would probably be easier to just have SSH and get
> it published on standards track.  If we want to have SCP and SFTP we
> probably need to go informational.  We can do two documents, SSH
> followed by SCP and SFTP.
> 
> Once we decide what we think is the right content we can as the security
> ADs what the appropriate procedure should be.
> 
> <tp>
> 
> Alternatively, ask the Application area ADs; I think that this is more about
> URIs than about security, and I see URIs being handled by the two Application
> ADs.
> 
> Tom Petch
> </tp>
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Joe
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ietf-ssh-owner at NetBSD.org
> > [mailto:ietf-ssh-owner at NetBSD.org] On Behalf Of Steve Suehring
> > Sent: Sunday, October 04, 2009 12:32 PM
> > To: ietf-ssh at netbsd.org
> > Subject: URI Draft
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > I've received a question about the status of the ssh URI
> > draft.  I'd like to take this up again but now that the secsh
> > WG is closed, what's the proper procedure for moving the ssh
> > URI draft forward?
> >
> > Here are a couple relevant links from when it was last left:
> >
> > http://osdir.com/ml/ietf.secsh/2006-08/msg00000.html
> >
> > http://osdir.com/ml/ietf.secsh/2006-08/msg00001.html
> >
> > Can this be submitted as an individual submission or is there
> > a WG chair that might take this under their area?
> >
> > Steve