Yet Another Mail Working Group Minutes Meeting : IETF81, Tuesday 26 July, 2011 Location: Quebec City, 204B, 17:10 to 18:10 Chairs : Tony Hansen , SM Guest chair: Chris Newman Minutes : Murray S. Kucherawy AGENDA A. Meeting Administrivia Note well Agenda bashing B. Status of draft-ietf-yam-rfc4409bis C. Rechartering D. Any Other Business A. Meeting Administrivia Tony Hansen chaired the the IETF81 YAM Working Group meeting in Quebec City, Canada. Murray S. Kucherawy was the scribe. Joseph Yee was the Jabber scribe. Since SM was not present, Chris Newman guest chaired. The Chair brought the Note Well to the attention of the meeting participants, asked them to sign the blue sheets, bashed the agenda and provided the URLs to the meeting materials. B. Status of draft-ietf-yam-rfc4409bis The Working Group Last Call for RFC 4409bis has been completed. A new version of the draft will be posted incorporating some comments from Chris Newman and there will be a new WGLC. There was some discussion about timeout text that may not account for some clients, such as web clients. John and Randy to update text to take Chris' concerns into account. C. Rechartering The Chair asked John Klensin to comment on a message to the mailing list about the value proposition associated with other specs, especially if a two-step standards process is adopted. The charter discussion was summarized and the goals of the existing charter were pointed out: (a) advance docs to full standard (b) process experiment The working group has been on hiatus for the past year because of the two-track proposal. As the two-track proposal hasn't been adopted, the question put to the working group was: - well two-track hasn't been adopted; should we continue to wait? - proposed new charter presented - or do we just shut down? shift current work to appsawg or the ISE? Pete Resnick mentioned that he can't see the difference between totally rechartering and just starting a new WG. The question would need to be discussed on the mailing list to come to a conclusion. Dave maintained the value proposition is negative; this is strategic and tactical work, not current pressing work. Dave pointed out there's no apparent energy in the room to continue; we should shut down. Barry and John concurred; Pete also concurred; he would prefer not to go indefinitely dormant. Barry does not want APPSAWG to become a dumping ground for stuff WGs don't want to do. John is concerned about mail stuff being dumped into APPSAWG; he would prefer brief focused WGs. Pete does not want to do mail documents as individual submissions if it can be avoided. If necessary, individual submissions need to be fully processed before bringing them to an AD. Pete recommended recommends lining up reviewers for each document ahead of time, make some hard deadlines. The Chair asked for a hum on the question of shutting down the working group. The question asked was: - The two-track hasn't been adopted; should we continue to wait? - or do we just shut down? Although the air conditioning unit appeared to be consistently opposed to the shut down, the consensus was solid to shut down the working group. D. Any Other Business Murray will start up multipart/report update to see if APPSAWG wants it or if it should go as individual. Mike O'Rierdan from Comcast asked for review of his email transition document. The Chair ended the meeting at 18:11.