Formal consultation prior to closing the secsh working group

[Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf%mit.edu@localhost>]

Hi folks.

The ssh working group has accomplished its primary objective and has
published the core protocol as RFCs.  We've also published several
related extensions.

We have not managed to publish the filexfer, URI or X.509 drafts.

However, I've come to the conclusion that there is insufficient energy
in this working group to continue reviewing or producing documents.
All of our milestones are from 2005.  There seems to be no significant
activity on anything other than the filexfer draft.  

I'm very concerned about the filexfer draft.  It is well on the way to
becoming a filesystem, not just an ftp-like protocol.  I am concerned
that we don't have enough reviewers to manage the complexity of the
draft and to force us to make hard decisions about what features we
really need.  Instead, we're close to including everything.  I have
received several private comments to this effect.  I am not sure that
we have the skill set necessary to design and review a filesystem
document and I think that is what filexfer is becoming.


RFC 2418 defines procedures for creating, managing and terminating of
working groups.  That document stresses the importance of an active
community of reviewers and subject matter experts.  IT makes it clear
that it is the responsibility of the working group to make sure the
right people are available to do the work of the WG.

I no longer think this working group has sufficient reviewers or
contributors.  So, I propose to close the working group.

RFC 2418 requires a formal consultation prior to closing a working
group.  This message serves as the beginning of such a consultation.
I'd like to solicit comments on the proposal to close the secsh
working group by August 14, 2006.


Thanks,

Sam Hartman
Security Area Director