Subject: [ftpext] WG Action: FTP Extensions, 2nd edition (ftpext2)

From: IESG Secretary <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 10:48:35 -0800 (PST)

A new IETF working group has been formed in the Applications Area.  For
additional information, please contact the Area Directors or the WG
Chairs.

FTP Extensions, 2nd edition (ftpext2)
---------------------------------------------------
Current Status: Active Working Group

Chair(s): 
 Anthony Bryan <[email-masked]>
 Tony Hansen <[email-masked]>

Applications Area Directors:
 Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
 Peter Saint-Andre <[email-masked]>

Applications Area Advisor:
 Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>

Mailing Lists:
 General Discussion: [email-masked]
 To subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ftpext
 Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ftpext/

Description of Working Group:

The Standard File Transfer Protocol specification in RFC 959
has been updated several times with command extensions of one
sort or another, including those based on the extension
mechanism of RFC 2389 (a complete list appears in RFC 5797 and
the corresponding IANA registry at
http://www.iana.org/assignments/ftp-commands-extensions).

The following are active FTP related drafts:

  draft-bryan-ftp-hash
  draft-hethmon-mcmurray-ftp-hosts
  FTP extensions to support IPv4/IPv6 translation scenario
  draft-klensin-ftp-typeu-00 - FTP Extension for Internationalized Text

The Working Group will:
* Review and finalize drafts listed above.
* Review and confirm or reject errata of current FTP RFCs.
* Investigate the differences between FTP in theory
 (current RFCs) and practice, and recommend future work to align them.
 Any future work would require rechartering of the WG.

The Working Group's specification deliverables are:
* A document that specifies the HOST command (Proposed Standard).
* A document that specifies the HASH command (Proposed Standard).
* A document that specifies FTP extensions to support IPv4/IPv6
translation scenario.
* A document that specifies FTP extensions for Internationalized Text.

The Working Group must not introduce a new version of FTP, e.g.
an incompatible FTP 2.0.

Goals and Milestones:

Nov 2010  Submit 'File Transfer Protocol HOST Command for Virtual
         Hosts' as working group item (draft-hethmon-mcmurray-ftp-hosts 
         will be used as a starting point)
Nov 2010  Submit 'File Transfer Protocol HASH Command for
         Cryptographic Hashes' as working group item (draft-bryan-ftp-
         hash will be used as a starting point)
Nov 2010  Submit 'FTP extensions to support IPv4/IPv6 translation'
         as working group item (draft-liu-ftp64-extension will be used 
         as a starting point)
Dec 2010  Working group Last Call of HOST document
Jan 2011  Submit 'File Transfer Protocol HOST Command for Virtual
         Hosts' to the IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard
Jan 2011  Working group Last Call of HASH document
Feb 2011  Submit 'File Transfer Protocol HASH Command for
         Cryptographic Hashes' to the IESG for consideration as a 
         Proposed Standard
Mar 2011  Working group Last Call of 'FTP extensions to support
         IPv4/IPv6 translation' document
Apr 2011  Submit 'FTP Extension for Internationalized Text'
         as working group item
May 2011  Submit 'FTP extensions to support IPv4/IPv6 translation'
         to the IESG for consideration as Proposed Standard
Jul 2011  Working group Last Call of 'FTP Extension for 
         Internationalized Text'
Aug 2011  Submit 'FTP Extension for Internationalized Text'
         to the IESG for consideration as Proposed Standard
Sep 2011  Close or recharter

---

From: Anthony Bryan <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 16:17:24 -0500

so, wow, looks like things are rolling along! :)

as you can see, our WG got approved last Thursday.

I'm very happy to see comments on
draft-peterson-streamlined-ftp-command-extensions still coming in.
please chime in if you haven't already.

I'm new to this, so I wonder what the first order of business is?

here are some ideas:

1) we have 4 drafts on the charter, 3 of which are "active" (John
hasn't updated draft-klensin-ftp-typeu yet). once these are submitted
with the string '-ftpext2-' in the
draft name, they will show up at http://tools.ietf.org/wg/ftpext2/

I think our ID draft-bryan-ftp-hash becomes ietf-ftpext2-hash then? (&
the others follow in a similar fashion).

should this be done now? we should change the WG at the top of our
drafts I guess. how is this done in xml2rfc? is there anything else
that needs to be changed?

2) making sure everyone who would be interested in this WG knows about
it's existence.

now that it's official, I hope more people will hear about it.

Alun mentioned inviting members of the old WG. I think think we can
get a subscriber list, but the archives are at
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/text/ftpext/ if anyone could go
through & invite them...

is there anyone else that should be invited?

thanks for being here & helping us to improve FTP!

-- 
(( Anthony Bryan ... Metalink [ http://www.metalinker.org ]
  )) Easier, More Reliable, Self Healing Downloads

---

From: Tony Hansen <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 18:55:44 -0500

> the others follow in a similar fashion).

When the next update is ready for each draft, each author should upload 
the draft under the WG name. Bryan's naming suggestion is apropos:

draft-bryan-ftp-hash => draft-ietf-ftpext2-hash
draft-hethmon-mcmurray-ftp-hosts => draft-ietf-ftpext2-hosts
draft-klensin-ftp-typeu => draft-ietf-ftpext2-typeu

John, since yours is long expired, it would be useful if you just upload 
it under the new name so people can start commenting on it.

> that needs to be changed?
This is optional: it is done by using the <workgroup> element in the 
<front> matter.

     Tony Hansen
     [email-masked]

---

From: Anthony Bryan <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 02:38:47 -0500

On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 6:55 PM, Tony Hansen <[email-masked]> wrote:
> When the next update is ready for each draft, each author should upload the
> draft under the WG name. Bryan's naming suggestion is apropos:
>

thanks, Tony.

I saw that the websocket draft, when converting from an individual's
to a WG draft, had no changes.
http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-hybi-thewebsocketprotocol-00.txt

is that how most people do it, or do we wait for substantive changes?

there is also
draft-liu-ftp64-extension => draft-ietf-ftpext2-ftp64 ?

which after discussion during the charter, should be changed to
"Intended status: Standards Track"

> This is optional: it is done by using the <workgroup> element in the <front>
> matter.

ahh, I'd been wondering!

I've changed it. we all might as well...now that we've got the WG,
time to flaunt it. :)
-- 
(( Anthony Bryan ... Metalink [ http://www.metalinker.org ]
  )) Easier, More Reliable, Self Healing Downloads

---

From: Tony Hansen <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 09:49:56 -0500

On 11/24/2010 2:38 AM, Anthony Bryan wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 6:55 PM, Tony Hansen<[email-masked]>  wrote:
It can be done either way. If there are changes pending for a draft at 
the same time, then it can be done as part of that update. If there are 
no pending changes, then you can either just do it or wait for changes 
to appear; it's a judgment call. (If an individual draft is in its final 
state and ready for publication, the name change is a formality that can 
be done immediately just as a matter of course.)

> "Intended status: Standards Track"

Yes.

     Tony Hansen
     [email-masked]