Minutes interim-1992-iesg-20 1992-09-10 16:00
minutes-interim-1992-iesg-20-199209101600-00

											
Minutes of the IESG Teleconferences

    IETF STEERING GROUP (IESG)

    REPORT FROM THE TELECONFERENCE

    September 10th, 1992

    Reported by: Greg Vaudreuil, IESG Secretary

    This report contains IESG meeting notes, positions and action items.
    For more information please contact the IESG Secretary.

    iesg-secretary@nri.reston.va.us

    ATTENDEES
    ---------

    Almquist, Philip / Consultant
    Borman, David / Cray Research
    Crocker, Dave / TBO
    Crocker, Steve / TIS
    Gross, Philip / ANS
    Hinden, Robert / SUN
    Reynolds, Joyce / ISI
    Vaudreuil, Greg / CNRI

    Regrets
    Coya, Steve / CNRI
    Davin, Chuck / MIT
    Hobby, Russ /UC-Davis
    Huizer, Erik / SURFnet
    Piscitello, Dave/ Bellcore
    Stockman, Bernard / SUNET/NORDUnet

    AGENDA
    ------

    1) Administrivia
    o Review of Action Items
    o Approval of Minutes
    - August 24th
    - August 31st

    2) Protocol Actions

    o TCP/IP Header Compression
    o Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol
    o DHCP Options
    o Interworking of DHC and BootP
    o Decnet IV Control Protocol for PPP
    o String Representation of Distinguished Names
    o SNMP over OSI
    o SNMP over Appletalk
    o Generic Interface MIB
    o Token Ring MIB
    o Token Bus MIB
    o LAP-B MIB
    o X.25 Packet MIB
    o RIP Version 2
    o RIP Version 2 MIB
    o RIP Protocol Analysis

    3) Technical Management Issues

    o Better IESG Review of Working Group Efforts
    o ROAD Work Plan
    o Identity Protocol

    4) Working Group Actions

    o SNMP Evolution (snmpev)
    o P. Internet Protocol (pip)
    o IP Address Encapsulation (ipae)
    o Whois and Network Information Lookup Service (wnils)
    o Integration of Internet Information Service (iiis)
    o Remote Conferencing (remconf)
    o Connection IP (cip)

    MINUTES
    -------

    1) Administrivia

    o Bash the Agenda

    A discussion of the procedures and expectations for IESG review was
    scheduled for this meeting.

    o Approval of the Minutes

    The minutes of the August 24th teleconference were approved. The
    minutes of the August 31st were held over to allow additional
    review.

    2) Protocol Actions.

    o TCP Header Compression

    Dave Borman has worked to get clarifications and a new document
    produced with little sucess. After discussion possible courses of
    action, the IESG agreed to set a date of September 21st, after which
    the IESG would notify the IETF that it was unable to progress the
    document to Draft Standard status. This notification will include a
    solicitation for additional help.

    o Dynamic Host Configuration.

    The IESG reviewed the Dynamic Host Configuration documents and found
    them lacking both in editorial format and clarity and in technical
    completeness. The IESG discussed the degree of change needed to be
    done before the IESG would progress the documents.

    Action: Almquist -- Compile a list of minimum changes required in the
    Dynamic Host Configuration documents, submit these changes to the
    author and request the changes.

    o Decnet IV for PPP.

    The IESG did not review the PPP Extensions for Decnet Phase IV. The
    IESG noted the delay in reviewing this protocol and discussed
    procedures to insure that further delay is avoided.

    Action: Almquist -- Conduct a review of the PPP Extensions for Decnet
    IV by September 14th.

    o String Representation of Distinguished Names
    o SNMP over OSI
    o SNMP over Appletalk

    Neither Dave Piscitello nor Eric Huizer were present to discuss
    these protocols. The IESG did note that a discussion is occurring
    on the IESG and IAB mailing list about the rational for
    standardizing SNMP over other non-ietf protocol stacks. This has
    not yet been completely resolved but is a topic the IESG needs to
    address in the recommendation.

    Action: Vaudreuil -- Research the discussions on SNMP over other
    protocol stacks from the approval of the Multiprotocol SNMP Charter
    discussions and send to the IESG list.

    o Generic Interface MIB
    o Token Ring MIB
    o Token Bus MIB
    o LAP-B MIB
    o X.25 Packet MIB

    Chuck Davin was unable to attend this teleconference and these
    protocols were not discussed.

    o RIP Version 2
    o RIP Version 2 MIB
    o RIP Protocol Analysis

    The IESG reviewed the RIP Version 2 protocol. The protocol is
    straight forward and technically complete. The IESG is concerned
    about the general opposition to RIP as a routing protocol and tasked
    Hinden to get an external review of the constituency and
    architectural need for this protocol extension.

    Action: Hinden -- Assemble an external review of the case for making
    RIPV2 specification a proposed standard in preparation for sending the
    recommendation to the IAB.

    3) Technical Management Issues

    o Better IESG Review of Working Group Efforts

    The IESG discussed the need to improve the level of technical
    guidance and timeliness and began a review of its internal
    procedures for reviewing working group efforts and protocol
    documents. One recurring problem is that of an Area Director
    becoming swamped by a burst of standards activity, such as that
    currently experienced in the Internet Area. One successful
    management technique used in the Network Management and Security
    areas is that of using a body of experts as reviewers for
    specifications and mentors for working groups. After discussing
    these successes, the IESG agreed that all areas should create such
    advisory and review groups.

    POSITION: All IESG Areas should have advisory groups to facilitate
    better tracking of working group efforts and timely protocol review.

    Action: Vaudreuil -- Plan an hour during the September 21st
    teleconference for further discussion of IESG technical review.

    o Road Work Plan

    Hinden and Gross were unable to complete the IESG Routing and
    Addressing plan and plan to have this posted as an Internet Draft by
    September 14th.

    o Identity Protocol

    The IESG discussed the IDENT protocol and the controversy on the
    IETF list. After an analysis of the various documents and
    discussions by Dave Borman, the issues were reduced into a question
    about the interoperability between RFC 931 and currently deployed
    software as documented by TAP. It was the understanding that the
    technical differences between RFC 931, IDENT, and TAP were minor and
    with small changes to IDENT and reasonable implementation, there
    should be no interoperability problems.

    Action: Borman -- Document the analysis of IDENT and interoperability
    with similar protocols and send it to the IETF list.

    Action: S. Crocker -- Solicit reviews from other dis-interested
    individuals on the interoperability of IDENT, TAP, and RFC 931.

    Action: S. Crocker -- Ask the author of IDENT to submit a new document
    with changes necessary to insure the interoperability between IDENT and
    TAP and RFC931.

    4) Working Group Actions

    o SNMP Evolution (snmpev)

    A potential conflict with the SNMP Security Working Group was raised
    but without the attendance of Chuck Davin, was not resolved.

    o P. Intenet Protocol (pip)
    o IP Address Encapsulation (ipae)

    Both of these charters are on hold pending publication of the IESG
    ROAD work plan document. The charter for NIMROD is pending the
    formation of a Working Group and is not expected to be ready to send
    with the initial set of charters. No word has been heard from the
    TUBA camp.

    ACTION: Vaudreuil -- Send a poke to the TUBA folks to solicit a charter
    for their efforts.

    o Whois and Network Information Lookup Service (wnils)

    Russ Hobby was not on the teleconference to discuss this charter.
    The charter is waiting a refinement to narrow the scope of the work
    to templates and protocol clean-ups, not extensions.

    o Integration of Internet Information Service (iiis)

    A draft of the architecture statement was sent to the IESG list. A
    list of issues needing further work was suggested, including a more
    comprehensive discussion of security, including access and privacy,
    A narrowing of the NIR scope to exclude the drafting of templates,
    and the conceptual integration of the work of the IAFA and WNILS
    groups.

    Action: Reynolds -- Work with the relevant chairs to update the
    architecture statement and send updated charters to the IESG Secretary
    for recording.

    o Remote Conferencing (remconf)

    Discussion of this Working Group was deferred until Russ Hobby could
    participate.

    o Connection IP (cip)

    The IESG accepted the Working Group chairman suggestion that the
    group conclude.

    Action: Vaudreuil -- Announce the conclusion of the Connection IP
    Working Group.

    Appendix - Action Items
    --------

    Action: Almquist -- Compile a list of minimum changes required in the
    Dynamic Host Configuration documents, submit these changes to the
    author and request the changes.

    Action: Almquist -- Conduct a review of the PPP Extensions for Decnet
    IV by September 14th.

    Action: Vaudreuil -- Research the discussions on SNMP over other
    protocol stacks from the approval of the Multiprotocol SNMP Charter
    discussions and send to the IESG list.

    Action: Hinden -- Assemble an external review of the case for making
    RIPV2 specification a proposed standard in preparation for sending the
    recommendation to the IAB.

    Action: Vaudreuil -- Plan an hour during the September 21st
    teleconference for further discussion of IESG technical review.

    Action: Borman -- Document the analysis of IDENT and interoperability
    with similar protocols and send it to the IETF list.

    Action: S. Crocker -- Solicit reviews from other dis-interested
    individuals on the interoperability of IDENT, TAP, and RFC 931.

    Action: S. Crocker -- Ask the author of IDENT to submit a new document
    with changes necessary to insure the interoperability between IDENT and
    TAP and RFC931.

    ACTION: Vaudreuil -- Send a poke to the TUBA folks to solicit a charter
    for their efforts.

    Action: Reynolds -- Work with the relevant chairs to update the
    architecture statement and send updated charters to the IESG Secretary
    for recording.

    Action: Vaudreuil -- Announce the conclusion of the Connection IP
    Working Group.

    Appendix - Positions Taken
    --------

    POSITION: All IESG Areas should have advisory groups to facilitate
    better tracking of working group efforts and timely protocol review.

    Appendix - Outline for IETF Document Review
    --------

    - Document Info
    - Title, author, date of document, date of review, Area and AD
    - Name of reviewer
    - What is the proposed status (PS, DS, IS, Info, Exp)?
    - Is it part of a set of documents?
    - Technical Summary and Overview of the Protocol (~half page)
    - Technical Assessment (~half page)
    - Is the protocol technically sound as proposed?
    - Does it fit into the Internet architectural model? (or, does
    it stretch or violate the Internet architecture?)
    - How important is the protocol? Why is it needed?
    - What are the advantages and disdvantages (if any) of the
    chosen approach?
    - Document Quality (~half page)
    - Is the document well written overall? (eg, table of contents,
    appropriate level of background material, good references,
    easily to read and understand, etc)
    - Is it specified well enough for independent implementors to
    write interoperable implementations?
    - Summary of Working Group Deliberations (~half page)
    - Was there clear consensus on the issues?
    - Were there competing approachs to the problem
    -If so, do the supporters of the alternate approaches now
    support the WG document?
    - Has the I-D been openly available for review for the required period
    - Has the WG met openly (eg, at IETF meetings)
    - Was the WG generally on time and within their charter