Subject: Re: VCAR: RIGHTS Value Type Ambiguous

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 17:28:02 -0500

On the topics of VCAR's I'd like to hear from people on the list (Paul 
Hill, where are you!) who are familiar with authentication and access 
controls.  Also, for those of you are users not developers, you should 
also be looking at the VCAR notes.  I believe what VCAR's control is who 
has access to the calendars on the server store.  If you administer 
servers, than I think you understand what that means and that you care. My 
two cents...

---

From: Doug Royer <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 16:02:10 -0700

[email-masked] wrote:
> also be looking at the VCAR notes.  I believe what VCAR's control is
> who has access to the calendars on the server store.  If you
> administer servers, than I think you understand what that means and
> that you care.  My two cents...

Thanks! Pat.

In my opinion VCARs are going to be a *LARGE* debate - and that
is good! In a previous email, someone asked something LIKE (not
a quote):

	Do you really want that kind of debate over VCARS
	like we had over CAL-QL/SQL-MIN

YES!!!!!

If we did not have that debate over CAP-QL, we would not have resolved
the issues. Ignoring an issue on an IETF WG list only results in
a busted RFC or the WG exploding. Debate is HOW THE IETF WORKS!
Please participate!

I think we MUST do one of the following two things:

	(1) MOVE VCAR's into a separate draft.
OR
	(2) Understand that it is going to be a long debate
	    and that CAP is going to be delayed.

So, I again propose:

	Lets do (1), move VCARs into a separate draft and we
	can work on it at the same time if we want, and not
	slow down CAP.

	In cap requirements we specified that VCARs would be
	deferred. I can live with that to get CAP out the door.
	It means that for now in CAP we can call access control a
        administrative function to be defined at some later time.

If we were to assume that Bernards proposal was perfect and
solved all the issues. It's still not going to make MARCH.
And that is because it is going to take a month or two before
those of us that implement and read it to understand if it meets
all of the needs. There are going to be questions and misunderstandings.
That's part of the IETF.