Skip to main content

Minutes interim-1993-iesg-22 1993-10-07 15:30
minutes-interim-1993-iesg-22-199310071530-00

Meeting Minutes Internet Engineering Steering Group (iesg) IETF
Date and time 1993-10-07 15:30
Title Minutes interim-1993-iesg-22 1993-10-07 15:30
State (None)
Other versions plain text
Last updated 2024-02-23

minutes-interim-1993-iesg-22-199310071530-00

Minutes of the IESG Teleconferences

    Minutes from the IESG Teleconference

    October 7, 1993

    Reported by: Steve Coya, Acting 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
    ---------

    Coya, Steve / CNRI
    Crocker, Dave / SGI
    Hinden, Robert / SUN
    Huizer, Erik / SURFnet
    Klensin, John / UNU
    Knowles, Stev / FTP Software
    Mankin, Allison / NRL
    Reynolds, Joyce / ISI
    Piscitello, Dave/ Bellcore
    Rose, Marshall / DBC

    IAB Liaison
    Christian Huitema / INRIA

    Regrets

    Chapin, Lyman / BBN
    Bradner, Scott / Harvard
    Crocker, Steve / TIS
    Gross, Philip / ANS
    Yakov Rekhter / IBM

    1. Approval of the Minutes for September 23 was deferred.

    2. There were questions pertaining to old and current versions/RFCs of
    running IP over ARCNET. RFC1051, the original ARCNET document, is
    at STANDARD status. The status of RFC1201 was changed to HISTORIC in
    May of 1993. There was a request received the following month (June
    16, 1993) requesting that the IESG re-evaluate its decision, and
    move 1051 to HISTORIC and return 1201 back to the standards track
    and advance it. Stev Knowles reported that he did not believe there
    was enough constituency to support this effort.

    This item will be removed from the list of active items on the IESG
    agenda.

    3. Use of ISO CLNP in Tuba Envionments to Experimental was approved
    pending a review by Allison.

    ACTION: Allison to review document and report back to the IESG by
    10/12. If review is favorable, send out the IESG notification.

    4. The IESG approved the publication of "FTP Operation Over Big Address
    Records (FOOBAR)" as an Experimental RFC.

    5. The IESG approved the Stream Protocol (st2) Working Group

    6. The IESG approved the Address Lifetime Expectations (ale) Working
    Group once comments suggested by the IESG had been incorporated into
    the charter.

    ACTION: Coya to edit the charter and milestones based upon IESG
    requests, sending the draft to the Allison and Scott for final review.
    Once accepted, announce the formation of the Working Group.

    7. The IESG reviewed and approved the reworded text of the Policy
    statement pertaining to the handling of IPng documents and
    specifications. Policy to be sent to the IETF as quickly as
    possible.

    8. After a brief discussion, the IESG approved the formation of a ATM
    Informational BOF that will be held in Houston to provide an update as
    to what is happening in the ATM world.

    ACTION: Pistitello to inform Mark Laubach and tell him to request a BOF
    slot from the Secretariat.

    9. The IESG discussed the problems of reformatting, and editing a
    document for publication as an RFC after it has been approved by the
    IESG. Delays can occur due to exchanges between the RFC Editor and
    the author, and these may be unknown to the IESG, and perhaps the WG
    chair. Some authors claim that reformatting can change the way in
    which a sentence or paragraph is read, and might result in ambiguity
    or misimplementations. It was also reported that the RFC-Editors are
    spending a great deal of time on the reformatting effort itself, but
    due to time constraings this burden may have to shift back to the
    document author.

    POSITION: The IESG supports the procedure in which a document requiring
    changes for publication is returned to the author, and that the
    appropriate Area Directors AND the Working Group Chairs should be
    copied on the notice. Further, when a document is reformatted and ready
    to be resubmitted to the RFC-Editors, the Area Directors and WG Chair
    are to be notified and provided a chance at reviewing, primarily to
    confirm that technical details have remained the same.

    10. Stev Knowles agreed with the PPPEXT chair that the new Novel IPX-WAN
    specification should be published along with the previously approved IPX
    documents.

    ACTION: Knowles to contact Novell to obtain the document.