Subject: Re: [edu-team] Tutorials for next IETF in Prague?

From: Mirjam Kuehne <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2010 17:24:26 +0100

Hi all,

Olafur and Peter confirmed that they will provide the DNS tutorial (in a 
slightly modified version) in Prague.

We didn't get much feedback on the list of tutorials below. Shall we 
skip WG Leadership?

And Russ suggested topic for the WG lunch: Datatracker enhancements.

Let us know what you think so we can send the list to the secretariat 
before they start chasing us again ;-)

Mirjam

Mirjam Kuehne wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I hope all went well in Beijing. And thanks for starting to think about 
> IETF 80 already.
> 
> So far we have the following suggestions:
> 
> Newcomers (Scott) - Scott, will you be in Prague?
> 
> NroffEdit and xml2rfc (Alice) - Alice, do you wan to ask Bill Fenner or 
> Julian Reschke if they can help?
> 
> Routing, Bridging, Switching (Radia at 3 pm)
> 
> WG Leadership (Spencer Dawkins, David Harrington) - This was an idea 
> that came up a few weeks ago.
> 
> DNS for Programmers (Peter, Olafur) - they said they might consider 
> doing this in Prague, needs to be confirmed.
> 
> This is one too many. Which one do you think we should postpone?
> Maybe we should first confirm with Peter/Olafur and Spencer/David?
> 
> For the WG chairs lunch it was suggested to ask Carsten Borman talk 
> about the use of A/V equipment:
> http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/group/wgchairs/wiki/MeetingAV
> 
> Mirjam
> 
> 
> Radia Perlman wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 7:15 AM, Alice Hagens <[email-masked]> wrote:
>>> in-line
>>>
>>> On Nov 19, 2010, at 1:24 PM, Radia Perlman wrote:
>>>
>>>> Should we be planning the next IETF?  I suspect we want to give the
>>>> security one a rest.  I'd like to do the layer 2/3 one again, but
>>>> would prefer the 3 PM slot.
>>>>
>>>> As an idea for another semi-technical one...how about one for "tools
>>>> for preparing internet drafts", talking about the various ways people
>>>> do it, either nroff or xml2rfc?
>>>>
>>> I agree that this would be helpful. For IETF 80, I'm able to 
>>> co-present a tutorial that explains/demos NroffEdit and xml2rfc.
>>>
>>> Fyi, the existing slides for "Intro to xml2rfc" are here:
>>> http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc-editor/intro_xml2rfc.pdf
>>> In the past, Bill Fenner and Julian Reschke have demo'd "fancy" ways 
>>> to use xml2rfc as part of that tutorial.
>>>
>>> Perhaps such a tutorial could also demo other essential tools such as:
>>> - I-D nits
>>> - I-D submission tool
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Alice
>>>
>>
>>
>> Yes! It would be great to include those as well, and there ought to be 
>> time.
>>
>> Radia
>> _______________________________________________
>> edu-team mailing list
>> [email-masked]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-team
> 
>

---

From: Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2010 10:49:55 -0500

Hi Mirjam,

> We didn't get much feedback on the list of tutorials below. Shall we  

There was a suggestion at the WG Chairs Lunch that we do the WG Chairs  
Tutorial (specifically) as a Sunday Tutorial again, and I would be  
willing to put something together based on the old version (with or  
without a partner) if that is wanted.  I did the original WG Chairs  
Tutorial, so I should have the material around here somewhere...

Let me know,
Margaret

---

From: Mirjam Kuehne <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2010 11:13:25 +0100

Hi Margaret, hi all,

That would still mean we have one too many - unless we want to offer 5 
tutorials this time? Which is of course a possibility. In that case, we 
should let the secretariat know asap.

Mirjam

---

From: Mirjam Kuehne <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2010 16:28:49 +0100

Hi,

The secretariat confirmed that it is theoretically possible to provide 5 
tutorials in Prague: 3 in one slot and 2 in the other. Do we want that? 
Currently we have on offer:

Newcomers (Scott, 1 pm)

NroffEdit and xml2rfc (Alice)

Routing, Bridging, Switching (Radia, 3 pm)

WG Leadership (Spencer Dawkins, David Harrington, Margaret)

DNS for Programmers (Peter, Olafur)

WG chairs lunch: Datatracker Enhancements (who?)

We need to inform the secretariat early next week.

Kind regards,
Mirjam

---

From: Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2010 10:30:27 -0500

Either way is okay with me...  I thought you were saying that we  
should cancel WG Leadership because no one had commented on it, and I  
just wanted to put in a positive statement for doing WG Chairs  
Training, specifically, because that request (which seemed to seconded  
by others) during the WG Chair lunch.  If we don't have room for it in  
he schedule, maybe we could schedule it for next time?

Margaret

On Dec 8, 2010, at 5:13 AM, Mirjam Kuehne wrote:

> Hi Margaret, hi all,
>
> That would still mean we have one too many - unless we want to offer  
> 5 tutorials this time? Which is of course a possibility. In that  
> case, we should let the secretariat know asap.
>
> Mirjam
>
>>> We didn't get much feedback on the list of tutorials below. Shall  
>>> we skip WG Leadership?
>> There was a suggestion at the WG Chairs Lunch that we do the WG  
>> Chairs Tutorial (specifically) as a Sunday Tutorial again, and I  
>> would be willing to put something together based on the old version  
>> (with or without a partner) if that is wanted.  I did the original  
>> WG Chairs Tutorial, so I should have the material around here  
>> somewhere...
>> Let me know,
>> Margaret
>

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 15:50:24 +1300

I don't see a real problem in doing 5 tutorials; I think
the audiences will not overlap too much. Maybe not run
newcomers and nroff/xml2rfc in parallel?

I do think the WG Chairs one is overdue; and the announcement
should make it clear that potential BOF Chairs, and in fact
everyone, is welcome, not just new or potential WG Chairs.

Regards
   Brian Carpenter

On 2010-12-09 04:30, Margaret Wasserman wrote:
> 
> Either way is okay with me...  I thought you were saying that we should
> cancel WG Leadership because no one had commented on it, and I just
> wanted to put in a positive statement for doing WG Chairs Training,
> specifically, because that request (which seemed to seconded by others)
> during the WG Chair lunch.  If we don't have room for it in he schedule,
> maybe we could schedule it for next time?
> 
> Margaret
> 
>> tutorials this time? Which is of course a possibility. In that case,
>> we should let the secretariat know asap.
>>
>> Mirjam
>>
>>> (with or without a partner) if that is wanted.  I did the original WG
>>> Chairs Tutorial, so I should have the material around here somewhere...
>>> Let me know,
>>> Margaret
>>
>

---

From: Mirjam Kuehne <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 10:31:58 +0100

Thanks for your feedback. If I don't hear any objections, I'll send the 
following schedule to the secretariat tomorrow.

I am waiting for confirmation from Peter and Olafur if they are OK with 
the 13:00 slot. Radia, you wanted to be on the 15:00 slots, right?

13:00

- Newcomers (Scott Bradner)

- WG Leadership (Spencer Dawkins, David Harrington, Margaret Wasserman)
   (Open to anyone, not just potential WG chairs)

- The Domain Name System as a building block in IETF protocol design 
(Peter Koch, Olafur Gudmunsson)
NOTE: Peter and Olafur made some changes and sent a new description, 
included below.

15:00

- NroffEdit and xml2rfc (Alice Hagens)

- Routing, Bridging, Switching (Radia Perlman)

---

- WG chairs lunch: Datatracker Enhancements (who? Henrik?)

Mirjam
=======

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   The Domain Name System (DNS) as a building block in IETF protocol design
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Olafur Gudmundsson                   Peter Koch
              <[email-masked]>                  <[email-masked]>
             (DNSEXT co-chair)                (DNSOP co-chair)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Domain Name System (DNS) is one of the corner stones of the Internet.
Without the DNS, wide use of the network would not be that easily possible.
Various IETF working groups' protocols/applications have needs for universal
distribution of information related to their operation. Therefore the DNS
-- the only universal lookup service -- is the natural fit to carry certain
information.

While the DNS is indeed a very valuable and powerful tool and it has been
fulfilling its tasks quite well for more than two decades now, it cannot 
serve
all proposed new uses equally well. And even if the DNS is the lookup 
system of
choice, the extent to which the DNS can usefully contribute to another 
protocol
still needs to be considered.
After all, the DNS's strength, its global availability, turns out to be
a weakness when it comes down to protocol corner cases, operational issues
and some not immediately obvious properties.

This tutorial will cover DNS basics and how best to take advantage of DNS
in other, higher level protocols.

We will cover in particular frequently discussed topics and rumors as 
well as
design criteria to be used. Among the topics here are (in no particular 
order):

         o New RR types & Unknown RR type support
         o What Domain am I in?
         o DNS tree properties and non-properties
         o Additional-section processing rules
         o ...

Participants in this tutorial will gain an understanding of the DNS, its
principles and operation.  Given the time constraints and the special
IETF focus, the tutorial will not cover DNS server or resolver 
configuration,
server operations or how to further develop or optimize the DNS protocol
intrinsics.  Fortunately, experiences with these aren't expected, either.

This is a cross-area effort, so most welcome to attend are people designing
protocols in, e.g., the Applications and RAI areas (wg chairs, document
editors, design team members, other interested parties). We will also 
address
"early document review".

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Mirjam Kuehne <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 10:35:27 +0100

Hi Margaret,

Are you going to get in touch with David and Spencer about doing the WG 
Leadership tutorial together with you (and about including the 
additional topics suggested on the list)?

Cheers,
Mirjam

---

From: Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2010 00:00:08 -0500

On Dec 13, 2010, at 4:31 AM, Mirjam Kuehne wrote:

> Thanks for your feedback. If I don't hear any objections, I'll send  
> the following schedule to the secretariat tomorrow.
>
> I am waiting for confirmation from Peter and Olafur if they are OK  
> with the 13:00 slot. Radia, you wanted to be on the 15:00 slots,  
> right?
>
> 13:00
>

I am not wild about the name WG Leadership.  That class incorporated  
material for WG chairs, editors and secretaries, and the material for  
WG chairs was reduced to fit.  I would prefer to see us to actual WG  
Chair training.

Before advertising it, I think we need to be able to describe it...   
Have Spencer and Dave agreed to do this?  If so, we certainly don't  
need three presenters, and I will back out.  But, if that is the case,  
I would like to see a description of what they plan to present.

Sorry for sending this late, but I think there was some  
misunderstanding about what I was discussing doing, which wasn't this  
class but instead something based on the old WG chairs training.

Margaret

---

From: Mirjam Kuehne <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2010 08:35:40 +0100

Hi Margaret,

Sorry for the misunderstanding. I thought you were suggesting to somehow 
merge the two.

Can you please agree this with Spencer and David and inform Marcia.

Thanks,
Mirjam

Margaret Wasserman wrote:
>> with the 13:00 slot. Radia, you wanted to be on the 15:00 slots, right?
>>
>> 13:00
>>
> material for WG chairs, editors and secretaries, and the material for WG 
> chairs was reduced to fit.  I would prefer to see us to actual WG Chair 
> training.
> 
> Have Spencer and Dave agreed to do this?  If so, we certainly don't need 
> three presenters, and I will back out.  But, if that is the case, I 
> would like to see a description of what they plan to present.
> 
> Sorry for sending this late, but I think there was some misunderstanding 
> about what I was discussing doing, which wasn't this class but instead 
> something based on the old WG chairs training.
> 
> Margaret
>

---

From: Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2010 09:55:32 -0500

On Dec 14, 2010, at 2:35 AM, Mirjam Kuehne wrote:

> Hi Margaret,
>
> Sorry for the misunderstanding. I thought you were suggesting to  
> somehow merge the two.
>

I'll see what I can do...

But, if you already have agreeement to do WG Leadership with Spencer  
and David, we could go with that and consider WG Chairs next time, or  
the time after that...  I don't want to mess with whatever folks are  
already working on.

Margaret

---

From: Mirjam Kuehne <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 09:55:30 +0100

Margaret Wasserman wrote:
> But, if you already have agreeement to do WG Leadership with Spencer and 
> David, we could go with that and consider WG Chairs next time, or the 
> time after that...  I don't want to mess with whatever folks are already 
> working on.
> 

Hi Margaret,

No, I don't have agreement with David and Spencer. I thought you were 
taking care of that, but apparently you were talking about another 
tutorial all together :-(

Mirjam

---

From: Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 06:14:10 -0500

Hi Mirjam,

> No, I don't have agreement with David and Spencer. I thought you  
> were taking care of that, but apparently you were talking about  
> another tutorial all together :-(

Okay, let me talk to them and see if we can come up with a plan...

Margaret