CURRENT_MEETING_REPORT_

Reported by Urs Eppenberger/SWITCH

Minutes of the Notifications and Acknowledgements Requirements
Working Group (NOTARY)

The NOTARY Working Group met at the 32nd IETF on Monday, 3 April and
Thursday, 6 April.


Draft Agenda

   o Identify and resolve all outstanding issues on the following
     documents:

     (1) draft-ietf-notary-mime-delivery-04.txt (Monday)
     (2) draft-ietf-notary-smtp-drpt-03.txt (Monday)
     (3) draft-ietf-notary-mime-report-01.txt (Thursday)
     (4) draft-ietf-notary-status-01.txt (Thursday)


   o Presentation and approval of revised documents; decide on document
     fate

   o New working groups for remaining issues like receipt notifications
     and vacation notices


Document Review

   o Walk through of (1) draft-ietf-notary-mime-delivery-04.txt

      -  Section 2 started the discussion of whether the content-type
         should be specific for delivery status notifications as
         proposed in (1) (message/delivery-status) or if a general type
         should be used as proposed in (3).  The decision:  (1) stays as
         is, (3) will be adjusted.

      -  Section 2.3.6:  Should a `X-protocol-diagnostic:'  mechanism
         allow to tunnel diagnostic information from protocol A to B to
         A? The decision:  (1) stays as is.


   o Walk through of (2) draft-ietf-notary-smtp-drpt-03.txt

      -  Section 7.2.7 and 7.2.8 are replaced and presented on Thursday.


   o Between Monday and Thursday all four documents have been updated.

   o Final review of (3) draft-ietf-notary-mime-report-01.txt

      -  Document changes and general content is blessed.


   o Review of (4) draft-ietf-notary-status-01.txt

      -  The document is basically stable.  It goes onto the standards
         track.


   o Final review of (1) draft-ietf-notary-mime-delivery-04.txt

      -  Action:  RELAYED/DELIVERED needs better text provided by John
         Myers.
      -  Action:  send the Internet-Draft to IANA to check on the
         procedure for the registration.


   o Final review of (2) draft-ietf-notary-smtp-drpt-03.txt

      -  Action:  John Myers to provide text about what to do when
         messages with invalid forward and return path arrive.


Definition of the Next Steps

All documents go onto the Standards track.


   o April 14 -- Incorporate comments from the list and the meeting
   o April 21 -- New Internet-Draft
   o April 21 -- Working group last call
   o May 5 -- Comment deadline
   o May 5 -- Send to the IESG as Proposed Standards
   o May 5 -- IESG Last Call


Other E-mail Extensions

A number of other e-mail extensions have been discussed in a short
session:


   o Receipt Notifications
   o Vacation
   o Moderator information
   o Change of address
   o Voting
   o Signature
   o Auto-submitted


Tagging of messages as reports is considered a useful functionality
since


   o it distinguishes reports from interpersonal messages,
   o enables language translation and
   o enables UAs to process the response.


Receipt Notifications provide important functionality.


AOB

Ned Freed and Einard Stefferud will write a charter for a working group.
Roger Fajman agreed to be document editor and to assist with the
charter.