Minutes interim-1992-iesg-10 1992-04-16 16:00
minutes-interim-1992-iesg-10-199204161600-00

IETF STEERING GROUP (IESG)

    REPORT FROM THE TELECONFERENCE

    April 16th, 1992

    Reported by: Greg Vaudreuil, IESG Secretary

    This report contains

    - Meeting Agenda
    - Meeting Attendees
    - Meeting Notes

    Please contact IESG Secretary Greg Vaudreuil for more information.

    ATTENDEES
    ----------

    Chiappa, Noel
    Crocker, Dave / TBO
    Crocker, Steve / TIS
    Coya, Steve / CNRI
    Davin, Chuck / MIT
    Gross, Philip / ANS
    Hinden, Robert / BBN
    Huizer, Erik / SURFnet
    Reynolds, Joyce / ISI
    Piscitello, Dave/ Bellcore
    Stockman, Bernard / SUNET/NORDUnet
    Vaudreuil, Greg / CNRI

    Regrets
    Almquist, Philip / Consultant
    Borman, David / Cray Research
    Estrada, Susan / CERFnet
    Hobby, Russ / UC-DAVIS

    AGENDA
    -------

    1. Administrivia
    1.1 Bash the Agenda
    1.2 Approval of the Minutes
    1.2.1 92-03-18 and 92-03-19
    1.2.2 92-03-26
    1.2.2 92-04-02
    1.3 Next Meeting

    2 Review of Action Items

    3. Technical Management Issues
    3.1 Routing and Addressing (Phill Gross)
    3.2 Procedures for the Evolution of protocols (Steve Coya/ Greg Vaudreuil)
    3.3 Internet Draft Formatting Requirements (Steve Coya)
    3.4 RDA over TCP (Russ Hobby)
    3.5 Teleconferencing times (Steve Coya)
    3.6 Chartering Rare WG1 as an IETF WG. (Erik Huizer)
    - TSIG Interactions
    3.7 Internet/Routing Directorate (Chiappa/Hinden)
    3.8 Restructuring the IETF Plenary Agenda
    3.9 IAB charter
    3.10 Interaction with Apple

    4. Protocol Actions

    4.1 Interdomain Policy Routing
    4.2 PPP Authentication

    5. Working Group Actions

    TO BE CREATED
    5.1 Network Access Servers (nasreq)
    5.2 MIME-MHS Interaction (mimemhs)
    5.3 TCP Client Identity Protocol (ident)

    TO BE CONCLUDED
    5.4 Router Discovery
    5.5 Remote Lan Monitoring MIB
    5.6 Bridge MIB
    5.7 Decnet Phase IV MIB
    5.8 Special Host Requirements
    5.9 OSI Internet Management

    Minutes

    1.0 Administrivia

    1.1 Review of the Agenda
    The Agenda was approved as written.

    1.2 Minutes

    1.2.1 March 18th, 19th minutes

    These minutes from the IESG meetings during the San Diego
    Plenary IETF meetings were approved.

    1.2.2 March 26th
    There were some changes suggested to clarify the discussion
    SNMP Security. A new version will be sent to the IESG for
    approval.

    1.2.3 April 2nd
    There were some changes needed to complete tables and clarify
    the discussion. A new version will be sent to the IESG for
    approval.

    1.3 Next Meeting
    The next meeting of the IESG was scheduled for April 27th, 12-2
    EDT.

    2.0 Review of Action Items

    A review of action items was deferred.

    3.0 Technical Management Issues

    3.1 Routing and Addressing Issues

    Philip Almquist was unable to attend and review the IESG
    recommendations on future routing and addressing. Bernhard Stockman
    volunteered to lead a group in developing an address assignment
    plan. He serves on RIPE, IEPG as well as the IESG and is in a
    strong position to facilitate quick action.

    ACTION: Stockman -- Create an action plan for generating an address
    assignment plan. Serve as the responsible party to facilitate work.

    3.2 Evolution of Protocols

    Bob Braden sent to the IESG a list of protocols which have been
    stuck in the standards process beyond their maximum time in grade.
    The IESG is responsible for recommending action on these
    documents. To track these protocols, and know when they are ready
    for advancement and when they are set to expire, better reporting
    is needed.

    ACTION: Coya -- Create a protocol aging report from the data kept in
    the IETF tracking system to enable Area Directors to better track
    protocols in progress.

    Action is needed on the protocols sent by Braden. A review was
    scheduled for the next IESG meeting.

    ACTION: Coya -- Assign the protocols listed by Braden to an Area
    Director for review. Add a review of these protocols to the next
    agenda.

    3.3 Internet Draft Formatting requirements

    The IAB has requested that the IESG create and the IETF Secretariat
    enforce a requirement that Internet Draft have special text on each
    page and additional information on the cover page of the document
    clearly indicating that this is a working paper.

    The IESG discussed mechanisms to achieve this goal without presenting
    an excessive burden on authors of what are rough drafts. Currently
    there are templates in the Internet Draft for nroff, tex, and
    scribe with the boilerplate text. With an expansion of these
    templates, and a re-write to make them conformant with the new
    guidelines the IESG agreed that the requirements should not be too
    burdensome.

    Action: Vaudreuil -- Assemble and update templates for common mark-up
    languages in the Internet Drafts directory.

    The Secretariat has the responsibility to enforce the guidelines
    and should work to insure that the work of the IETF is not unduly
    impeded during the transition to more rigorous formatting
    requirements.

    3.4 Remote Database Access over TCP

    Russ Hobby was not present to discuss this topic.

    3.5 Teleconferencing Times

    To better facilitate the needs of the IESG members, the
    teleconferences have been moved to Mondays from 12-2PM.

    3.6 Chartering external groups as IETF WG's

    3.6.1 Chartering Rare WG1 as a IETF WG.

    The RTC (Rare Technical Committee) met for the first time May 15th.
    The meeting was devoted primarily to administrative issues, and did
    not discuss the details of cross-chartering a working group with the
    IETF. The idea was mentioned and applauded. There were a few
    questions about how this would all fit into the ISOC structure.
    Further action will be needed within WG1.

    ACTION: Huizer -- Craft an IETF charter for the Rare MHS working
    group.

    The usages of the terms task force, and working group in RARE have
    the directly inverse meeting of the IETF usage of the words. Rare
    has discussed changing their use of the words to corresponded more
    nearly to the usages in the IETF. While the IESG recognizes that the
    RARE usage of the words are more "correct" the IESG appreciates the
    efforts of RARE to align their terminology with the historical IETF
    usage.

    3.6.2 TSIG

    Steve Crocker has been in a dialogue with the Trusted Systems
    Interoperability Group. TSIG and IETF have two jointly chartered
    working groups, TNFS and CIPSO. TSIG is much like the IETF was in
    its earlier days. TSIG has regular plenary meetings which do not
    corresponded to IETF plenary meetings. Because most TNFS and CIPSO
    members are TSIG members, they prefer to meet with the TSIG. By not
    meetings with the IETF, a communications gap has resulted.

    Several suggestions were made. CIPSO and TNFS have not been
    publishing their minutes in the IETF proceedings, nor in the IETF
    directories. This practice would help keep IETF members informed.

    ACTION: Vaudreuil -- Gather the get the minutes of the CIPSO and TNFS
    Working Groups and post them in the IETF directory.

    3.7 Unified directorate for Routing and Addressing

    The recent Routing and Addressing work has pointed to a need for a
    group of experts, a directorate for Routing and an directorate for
    Internet Addressing. These issues are intricately related and it
    makes sense to share expertise.

    The IESG discussed the merits of a unified directorate, and while it
    would seem to be helpful, there was discussion on whether it would
    better to redivide the responsibilities between the groups in a
    better manner. On suggestion was to keep IP over Foo in the
    Internet Area, but issues of IP packet addressing and forwarding to
    the Routing area.

    No conclusion was reached, and the IESG members were asked to think
    about the issues and continue the discussion next week.

    ACTION: Hinden -- Send a list of potential members for a Routing and
    Addressing Directorate to the IESG.

    3.8 Restructure the IETF Plenary Agenda

    The Open Plenary seems to be of decreasing utility in comparison to
    the need for working group sessions. The Open Plenary continues to
    be of value, but it is no longer a forum for reviewing protocol
    actions now that the last call has been formalized. A proposal has
    been made to de-emphasize the Open Plenary by moving it to the
    Evening and adding one or two working group sessions in it's
    place.

    The IESG discussed several options but reached no resolution. This
    discussion will be continued during the next teleconference.

    3.9 IAB Charter

    Discussion on the IAB charter under ISOC was deferred due to lack of
    time.

    3.10 Interactions with Apple

    Discussion on current efforts to harmonize Apple Networking protocol
    work in the IETF was deferred.

    4.0 Protocol Actions

    4.1 InterDomain Policy Routing

    IDPR is a new routing protocol waiting for a last call. There is a
    bit of new discussion in the working group about the appropriate
    status for this protocol. The IESG briefly discussed strategies for
    managing discussion, but deferred any decision to issue a last
    call.

    4.2 PPP Authentication

    Dialogue between Bill Simpson, Brian Lloyd, and Steve Crocker is
    continuing. A new version reflecting a clearer understanding of the
    contested issues is expected shortly.

    5.0 Working Group Actions

    5.1 Network Access Server (nasreq)

    Russ Hobby was not present to discuss the formation of this Working
    Group.

    5.2 Mime-Mhs (mimemhs)

    The Mime/MHS Interworking Working Group was approved by the IESG.

    ACTION: Vaudreuil -- Announce the mimemhs working group to the IETF list.

    5.3 TCP Client Identity Protocol (ident)

    The TCP Client Identity Protocol was approved by the IESG.

    ACTION: Vaudreuil -- Announce the ident working group to the IETF list.

    5.4 Router Discovery

    The IESG was not comfortable killing a working group for which there
    is no other working group responsible for evolving the protocol.
    There was not enough time to resolve the question of whether the
    group should continue as an active group or whether a new dormant
    state should be created.

    5.5 Remote Lan Monitoring

    The rlanmon MIB working group has completed the RMON MIB. Further
    responsibility for evolving that MIB now lies with the TRMON
    working group.

    6.6 Bridge MIB

    For the same reasons as Router Discover, discussion was deferred.

    5.8 Decnet Phase IV MIB

    For the same reasons as Router Discover, discussion was deferred.

    5.9 Special Host Requirements

    The Special Hosts Requirements working group has not met in over a
    year. There are no plans to continue with the charter, so this
    group was disbanded.

    ACTION: Almquist -- Notify the Bob Stewart that the Special Host
    Requirements working group has been concluded.

    1.10 OSI Internet Management

    The OSI Internet Management Working Group has not met in over two
    years. There is not a current charter, and no plans to continue
    work. The IESG disbanded this working group.

    ACTION: Davin -- Notify Brian Handspicker and Lee LeBare that the OSI
    Internet Management Working Group has been concluded.