[01:33:05] --- tonyhansen has joined
[01:33:11] <tonyhansen> test 1 2 3
[01:45:40] --- tonyhansen has left: Disconnected
[10:25:17] --- tonyhansen has joined
[12:05:39] --- tonyhansen has left
[14:26:48] --- tonyhansen has joined
[15:04:54] --- thepurplestreak has joined
[15:05:18] <thepurplestreak> The meeting isn't starting until later, I hope?
[15:30:11] <tonyhansen> hi there
[15:30:20] <tonyhansen> the meeting doesn't start for a while
[15:30:43] <tonyhansen> but the jabber groups are up 24x365
[15:31:33] <thepurplestreak> I did not know that.
[15:33:50] <tonyhansen> there are even a few non-group-specific jabber rooms, such as 'hallway' and 'plenary'
[15:39:05] <thepurplestreak> Oh --- what an eye-opener; I may never show up in person at IETF again!
[16:36:21] --- thepurplestreak has left
[16:36:47] --- thepurplestreak has joined
[16:38:03] --- randy has joined
[16:38:03] --- Hollenbeck has joined
[16:40:16] --- weddy has joined
[16:42:21] <Hollenbeck> This is a test.
[16:42:21] --- tonyhansen has left: Lost connection
[16:47:03] --- lisa has joined
[16:48:43] --- tonyhansen has joined
[16:48:44] --- dw2 has joined
[16:49:39] --- shmaes has joined
[16:49:42] --- dw2 has left
[16:52:02] --- alex has joined
[16:52:13] <alex> waves
[16:52:53] <alex> jabber.org is broken; I am logged in via friend's jabber account; can hear you well
[16:54:00] <tonyhansen> I just got logged in a couple minutes ago via jabber.org -- had the same problems getting in
[16:55:05] --- alex has left
[16:55:07] --- alex has joined
[16:55:32] <alex> "indeed, jabber.org is fixed!
[16:56:31] <thepurplestreak> Did he say "Steve" Crocker?
[16:56:39] <tonyhansen> no, dave crocker
[16:57:30] <tonyhansen> draft-crocker-email-arch-03.txt
[17:02:56] <alex> are they discussing Figure 3 of draft-ietf-opes-smtp-use-cases-00.txt?
[17:03:25] <thepurplestreak> Yes.
[17:07:04] <alex> . o O ( we should check that Mail Architecture document mentions OPES, if it is not too late )
[17:07:08] <tonyhansen> I've placed a copy of the slides at http://tony-hansen2.home.att.net/Minn-SMTP-abbie.ppt
[17:07:19] <tonyhansen> no it's not too late
[17:07:52] <tonyhansen> currently looking at pages 8 and 9
[17:08:25] <alex> thanks!
[17:09:47] <tonyhansen> page 10
[17:09:51] <alex> why are they talking about jeneral OPES evilness? Years after the WG got charterd?
[17:10:17] <tonyhansen> it was more of a side comment
[17:11:15] <alex> command satisfaction is producing a response to a command
[17:11:33] <alex> as opposed to modifying a command
[17:12:20] <tonyhansen> I think markus captured that
[17:18:46] <tonyhansen> page 13 -- pointer to http://http://www.martin-stecher.de/opes/smtpusecases.html
[17:18:46] --- alex has left: Lost connection
[17:20:05] <tonyhansen> page 15
[17:21:24] --- weddy has left: Logged out
[17:22:48] <tonyhansen> page 16
[17:23:11] --- alex has joined
[17:24:15] <alex> agrees that context handling would be very tricky on a single command level; tried to raise that point on the list too
[17:27:28] --- lisa has left
[17:29:06] <alex> that what use cases are ! Valid cases of use!
[17:29:54] <tonyhansen> yes
[17:31:44] --- resnick has joined
[17:33:02] --- lisa has joined
[17:33:21] <alex> this is a general OPES issue again!
[17:34:41] <thepurplestreak> The administrative boundary stuff is addressed in the architecture.
[17:34:48] <alex> nods
[17:35:30] --- Hollenbeck has left
[17:35:31] <tonyhansen> new sets of people, so some rehash is allowable, as long as it doesn't block us from moving forward
[17:35:50] --- pguenther has joined
[17:35:51] <thepurplestreak> Is he saying "milter" or "milford"?
[17:35:56] <alex> "Milter
[17:35:58] <resnick> milter
[17:36:49] <alex> We need to add Milter investigation to to-do items. I asked Martin about it some time ago, but we should not drop this important ball
[17:37:10] <tonyhansen> stands for "mail filter", a "competitor" if you will. it does not allow for sharing call out processors with multiple protocols.
[17:37:23] <tonyhansen> page 17
[17:37:32] <tonyhansen> pg 18
[17:39:54] --- randy has left: Replaced by new connection.
[17:39:55] --- randy has joined
[17:40:47] --- lisa has left
[17:40:49] <thepurplestreak> The confidentiality and integrity issues are discussed in accepted docs.
[17:44:02] <alex> we are not standardizing behavior!
[17:44:08] <alex> only a protocol
[17:46:37] <tonyhansen> pg 20
[17:47:22] --- shmaes has left: Disconnected
[17:47:39] <tonyhansen> pg 21
[17:47:46] --- shmaes has joined
[17:48:07] <alex> no
[17:48:41] <alex> we were already rechartered to do SMTP, wern't we?
[17:49:13] <thepurplestreak> That's what we're doing!
[17:49:34] --- resnick has left: Replaced by new connection
[17:49:35] --- resnick has joined
[17:49:43] <alex> right, so why is somebody wants us to recharter again?
[17:50:08] --- randy has left: Replaced by new connection.
[17:50:09] --- shmaes has left: Replaced by new connection
[17:50:09] --- randy has joined
[17:50:09] --- shmaes has joined
[17:51:04] <thepurplestreak> There is no protocol modification.
[17:51:30] <resnick> Suggestions of changes to return codes would be.
[17:51:49] <resnick> It's the specific suggested solutions that's getting Keith's knickers in a twist.
[17:52:46] <thepurplestreak> There's more than one meaning to the term; proxies are active protocol participants that do not change the definition of the protocol but are detectable users.
[17:53:53] <thepurplestreak> (I don't mean that there's more than one meaning "knickers in a twist")
[17:54:06] <resnick> I got that. :)
[17:54:11] <alex> how many people are in the real room?
[17:54:25] <resnick> A dozen or so.
[17:54:26] --- shmaes has left
[17:56:03] --- alex has left
[17:56:12] --- resnick has left
[17:57:54] <tonyhansen> 17 people in the room, plus markus and I
[17:58:12] --- tonyhansen has left
[17:58:22] --- thepurplestreak has left
[18:02:44] --- pguenther has left: Logged out
[18:03:05] --- randy has left
[22:13:55] --- lisa has joined
[22:23:40] --- lisa has left
[22:34:23] --- lisa has joined
[22:45:22] --- lisa has left
[23:27:48] --- lisa has joined
[23:50:04] --- lisa has left