Minutes interim-1993-iesg-16 1993-06-24 15:30
minutes-interim-1993-iesg-16-199306241530-00

											
Minutes of the IESG Teleconferences

    Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG)

    Report from the IESG Teleconference

    24 June 1993

    Recorded by: John Stewart, IESG Secretary

    This report contains IESG meeting notes, positions and action items.

    These minutes were compiled by the IETF Secretariat, which is supported
    by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. NCR 8820945.

    For more information please contact the IESG Secretary.
    iesg-secretary@cnri.reston.va.us.

    ATTENDEES
    ---------
    Bradner, Scott / Harvard
    Chapin, Lyman / BBN
    Coya, Steve / CNRI
    Crocker, Dave / SGI
    Crocker, Steve / TIS
    Gross, Philip / ANS
    Huizer, Erik / SURFnet
    Klensin, John / UNU
    Knowles, Stev / FTP Software
    Mankin, Allison / Locus
    Rose, Marshall / DBC
    Stewart, John / CNRI
    Vaudreuil, Greg / CNRI

    IAB Liaison
    Christian Huitema / INRIA
    Yakov Rekhter / IBM

    Regrets
    Hinden, Robert / SUN
    Piscitello, Dave/ Bellcore
    Reynolds, Joyce / ISI

    Minutes
    -------

    1. Administrative Issues

    o Roll Call

    o Revisions to the Agenda

    o Approval of the Minutes

    - The minutes of the 13 May, 27 May, and 10 June
    IESG teleconferences were approved.

    o Scott Bradner will not be in Amsterdam

    o The IESG/IAB lunch in Amsterdam will be Wednesday
    14 July; probably in the RAI for convenience.

    2. Protocol Actions

    o The IESG approved the elevation of the MIME Internet-
    Drafts ("MIME Part 1" and "MIME Part 2") to the status
    of Draft Standard.

    o The IESG approved the MIME-MHS Internet-Drafts ("Mapping
    between X.400 and RFC-822 Message Bodies," "Equivalences
    between 1988 X.400 and RFC-822 Message Bodies," and
    "HARPOON: Rules for downgrading messages from X.400/88
    to X.400/84 when MIME content-types are present in the
    messages") for the status of Proposed Standard.

    o The IESG approved the "Content-MD5 Header" Internet-Draft
    for the status of Proposed Standard.

    o The IESG approved the Common Authentication Technology
    Internet-Draft ("Generic Security Service Application
    Program Interface," "The Kerberos Network Authentication
    Service (V5)," and "Generic Security Service API:
    C-bindings") for the status of Proposed Standard.

    3. Working Group Actions

    o Multiparty Multimedia Session Control (mmusic) was
    approved as a working group under the Transport Area.

    o Inter-Domain Multicast Routing (idmr) was approved as a
    working group under the Routing Area.

    4. Working Group Informational Documents

    o Assertion of C=US; A=IMX <info>
    Erik Huizer said that the technical quality of the
    document is good, but there is a question about whether
    documents whose scope is limited to one nation are in
    the purview of the IESG/IETF. After some discussion,
    he said that he thinks it would be acceptable to
    approve this document for Experimental status, but that
    the IESG still needs to decide on a general policy for
    how to deal with documents of significance to a single
    nation. One person noted that this could be thought of
    analogous to NTP's current status; specifically,
    something which is of good technical quality, but is
    not appropriate or of interest to the entire IETF. It
    was also noted that if approving this document resulted
    in interoperability across U.S. borders, then perhaps
    it is not "just" pertinent to one nation.

    A question was brought up as to why the Internet needs
    a node so high up in the naming tree; a comment was
    also made that the ADMD=" " convention might break some
    current implementations. Naming in this context
    involves policy issues which are decided by an ANSI /
    U.S. State Department collaboration.

    ACTION (Klensin, Chapin): Edit the document for any particular
    content and/or terminology which may be expected by the ANSI /
    U.S. State Department collaboration.

    o Guidelines for OSPF / Frame Relay <info>
    No action to report.

    o Op Reqs for X.400 Mngmnt Domains in GO-MHS <info>
    Erik Huizer has not yet read the document. He will ask
    John Klensin to look at it.

    5. Management Issues

    o HP's complaint about TELNET Environment Option
    The crux of this problem is that the way the working group
    documented the environment option was inadvertently
    different than the reference implementation; the working
    group's solution to the inconsistency was to change the
    specification to match the implementation. This upset
    Hewlett-Packard because they coded to the RFC. It was
    noted that this is a clash of cultures resulting from the
    Internet's growth and attention by more parties. The way
    the IESG can address this issue in general is by setting
    policies for acceptable types of changes to go from
    Proposed to Draft and from Draft to Standard. For this
    specific case, the consensus was to allow the working
    group to make the change, but to do so in recycling the
    RFC back to Proposed (i.e., rather than going from
    Proposed to Draft Standard). Also, the working group will
    have to address any interoperability problems before moving
    up to Draft. As a general procedural matter, it was agreed
    that all organizations doing business with the IESG should
    do so via electronic mail.

    ACTION (Coya, Stewart): Draft a statement on acceptable types of
    changes that can happen when going from Proposed to Draft and
    from Draft to Standard.

    ACTION (Huizer, Klensin): Inform the telnet working group of the
    IESG's discussion, and supply them with a revised version of the
    document to be drafted by Coya and Stewart. This action should
    be taken before the IESG responds to Hewlett-Package.

    ACTION (Gross): Respond to Hewlett-Packard's complaint after the
    document to be drafted by Coya and Stewart is completed, and
    after the telnet working group has been told of the IESG
    discussion.

    o IP over ARCNET <rfc1201> from Historic to Draft
    Don Provan of Novell responded late to the Last Call
    with information to the effect that there were as many
    as five implementations of RFC1201. This issue will
    be tabled until the members of the IESG have a chance
    to see Provan's message.

    ACTION (Stewart): Send Don Provan's message to the IESG mailing
    list.

    o ATM Forum
    Allison Mankin reported that the June 21-23 ATM Forum
    meeting voted to object to the proposed IETF vc-routing
    charter of producing a routing protocol specification for
    ATM. This vote was consonant with the view of the ATM
    Forum's technical committee chair, Glenn Estes, who had
    previously talked with her about his disagreement with
    Fred Sammartino's (the President of ATM Forum's) position
    on vc-routing. As comment on the vote about IETF,
    Estes has stated that IETF members are welcome to participate
    in developing the standard in the ATM Forum, through their
    companies' Forum memberships. Standards contributions
    can only be received from Forum members. Further discussion
    on this will wait until Bob Hinden is able to participate.

    Christian Huitema reported that there was a similar discussion
    in an IAB teleconference recently.

    ACTION (Gross): Communicate the IESG's discussion on the IETF/ATM
    Forum issue to the IAB.

    ACTION (Mankin, Gross, Hinden): Talk privately about the IETF/ATM
    Forum issue, and then contact the vc-routing proposed working group
    chairs.

    o Router Requirements Working Group
    There has been no luck in contacting Phill Almquist, the
    current chair of Router Requirements, to try and find the
    working group's status.

    ACTION (Knowles): Continue to try to contact Almquist.

    ACTION (Gross, Rose, Knowles): Try to find new chair(s) and four
    editors.

    o BBN's request for ST-II demo
    Erik Huizer was concerned about BBN's last minute request
    and logistically complex request to do an ST-II demo.

    o Second IESG Liaison to the IAB
    During the period of the POISED activities, it was decided
    that the IESG and IAB should each exchange 2 representatives
    to participate on the other body. This would include the
    respective chairs and one other member.

    During these discussions, Bob Hinden was nominated, and
    tentatively agreed to serve, as the second IESG representative
    on the IAB. During this call, the IESG agreed to extend the
    invitation to Bob.

    During the discussion, it was noted that the IAB decided that
    the IETF chair would have an ex-officio vote on IAB matters, but
    the other IESG representative would not. There was a brief
    related discussion about whether the IAB should vote, or even
    participate, on the IESG. Because the IAB plays a part in
    appeals, some felt that this gave the IAB two votes. There was
    not enough of a discussion to come to consensus.

    ACTION (Gross): Talk to Bob Hinden about being the second IESG
    liaison to the IAB. (Note: Gross has since spoken to Hinden,
    and Hinden has agreed to serve.)

    o IETF Charter
    Phill Gross is currently working on it.

    ACTION (Gross): Present draft of the IETF Charter by Amsterdam.

    6. RFC Editor Actions

    o Simple Paging Protocol
    There was consensus that work of this nature should be the
    result of an IETF working group. Some felt that there
    were simpler ways to achieve the author's goal and that
    another protocol was not necessary. An extension will be
    requested from the RFC Editor so that the IESG can contact
    the author about participating in a working group effort.

    ACTION (Stewart): Request an extension from the RFC Editor so
    that the IESG can talk to the author about participating in a
    working group.

    o Reverse Bootp
    Dave Piscitello was not present, so there was little
    discussion.

    ACTION (Stewart): Request an extension from the RFC Editor so
    that we can get input from Dave Piscitello.