Subject: auth e394494a subscribe ietf-iotp Pierre Lourens <[email-masked]>
From: Pierre Lourens <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 02 Apr 1998 16:42:50 +0200

auth e394494a subscribe ietf-iotp Pierre Lourens <[email-masked]>

                                                                        

                                                                        

                                                                        
                                                
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message addressed to: [email-masked]
Archive available at: http://www.elistx.com/archives/ietf-iotp/

Date: Thu, 2 Apr 1998 03:38:16 -0500 (EST)
From: "Donald E. Eastlake 3rd" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Taking OTP to IETF
Sender: [email-masked]
Source-Info:  From (or Sender) name not authenticated.

>Hi there,

>Don made all his best efforts to convince Internet Open Trading Protocol 
>BoF participants about the desirability of forming a working group to 
>address interoperability issues among various payment protocols.  
>However, there are bunch of issues need to be addressed to make it more 
>appealing to the IETF community. Traditionally, IETF Working Groups 
>start with a requirement document, setup mailing list and kick off some 
>discussion before we take it to BOF. As we have not made good planning in 
>this effort, I would say, Don faced so many questions which we donot have 
>answers. 

I don't know that very many IETF working groups start with a requirements
documents before they are formed.  For protocols being done from scratch, it
is common for an early milestone to be done after the WG is formed is to
produce a requirements document.  But in this case, the baseline protocol
will already exist and the draft charter does provide for a requirements doc
to specify requirements for the next major version after v1.0. 

>To make working group successful, we must have a clearly defined charter,
>goals, and work items. Our current chater is more confusing and doesnot
>define clearly what it does and what is doesnot. Let us kick of some
>discussion on IOTP working Group charter. 

The charter can certainly do with improvement.  And there were some good 
questions on exactly what the scope of OTP is, qustions that I think are 
answered in the Business Description and, to a lesser extent, in the 
Preface to the Technical Specification.  But, while it needs improvement, 
I think the current draft charter is quite specific and clearly defines 
goals and milestones.  Items should probably be added concerning 
transport of OTP messages in HTTP, email, etc.

>Also, current OTP specification has a copyright notice on it, which is 
>not acceptable to IETF if we want to take it to IETF. Is it acceptable to 
>all OTP consortium members to take out these copyright and handover it to 
>IETF.  If all members in the list are interested in taking OTP( which is 
>really great idea as IETF can help us to get a high quality specification 
>by adding our Trading expertise to IETF), I can create a Requirements for 
>Internet Open Trading Protocol document quickly( In fact, I had already 
>started doing it -- I need all your help to complete it. In next couple of 
>weeks I will post it to this list) and after agreeing on this list we can 
>post it as an informational RFC to IETF. Then we can trigger some 
>discussions on the list. 

The most important thing in transitioning the protocol to the IETF would be
to transfer change control to the IETF but I guess we also have to
transfer that copyright to have the current spec published as an RFC and 
because the IETF would obviously need permission to create derivative 
works.

>Since there is a tremendous amount of work involved in managing the 
>Working Group, does all members in this list committed to support Don to 
>make this working group successful? 

>Any thoughts or comments?

>Surendra

>---

>Surendra Reddy
>Oracle Corp.,
>(650) 506 5441
>[email-masked]

82 people signed the attendance list at the BoF.  It looked to me like when
Harald Alvestrand took a poll, people were about 4 or 5 to 1 in favor of
forming a working group with a majority of the attendees voting... 
 
Donald
=====================================================================
Donald E. Eastlake 3rd     +1 978-287-4877(tel)     [email-masked]
   318 Acton Street        +1 978-371-7148(fax)     [email-masked]
Carlisle, MA 01741 USA     +1 703-620-4200(main office, Reston, VA)
http://www.cybercash.com           http://www.privacy.org/ipc

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message addressed to: [email-masked]
Archive available at: http://www.elistx.com/archives/ietf-iotp/