RE: iSCSI: Last Call process

["KRUEGER,MARJORIE (HP-Roseville,ex1)" <marjorie_krueger@hp.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Black_David@emc.com [mailto:Black_David@emc.com]
> Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 12:16 PM
> To: ni1d@arrl.net
> Cc: ips@ece.cmu.edu
> Subject: RE: iSCSI: Last Call process

...snip...

> > > Because the IESG has made that decision.  If the WG wants to get into
a
> > > process fight with the IESG over who gets to make that decision, the
> > > resulting delays will dwarf anything that could result from
consideration
> > > of DH-CHAP.  I would not advise this course of action.
> > 
> > When and where did the IESG make that decision?  Is there some message
> > from the IESG that documents the decision?  Is there a BCP that
> > describes the decision?
> 
> As with much AD/IESG guidance, this is the result of communication
> between the AD(s) and WG chair(s).  If you want a formal statement
> of instruction, I can try to get one, but it'll take at least a month
> to do so, and somehow I don't think the WG wants to wait for 
> that month ...

This is not a question of "the WG wanting to get into a process fight with
the IESG".  You haven't shared the reasoning behind the IESG (or is it an
AD?) insistence that we examine the proposed-but-non-existant DH-CHAP.

I also would like to hear a direct recommendation from the IESG and/or ADs.
I don't understand why the IESG would consider holding up a Transport area
draft when an acceptable authentication standard (SRP) exists, and instruct
a Transport area WG to work on a new authentication method.

Thanks,
Marjorie