RE: Draft Charter

["Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> When I mentioned "challenge-response", I meant the very general term
> as in CRAM, and not the common "challenge emails that require 'proof'
> of a human". 

Well that is going on but embedded deep in the TCP/IP sequence number.

The IP based auth is simply listing the valid IP addresses.

> There have been suggestions of adding a C-R system to
> the SMTP session to augment the TCP sequence numbers in authenticating
> the IP address.  If any proposal *required* this, it might rule out
> the use in an MUA.

That is not being proposed.

> I have not been seriously involved in IETF work groups before, but I
> was under the impression that requirement documents in the charter
> were not unheard off.  (And, yes, I have read the "Tao of IETF" and
> the WG RFC and such to try to get up to speed.)

I think that requirements docs can serve their purpose but not in 
a WG that has a three month charter.