Subject: [IESG-AGENDA-DIST] IESG Telechat Agenda (HTML) for October 4, 2007

From: IESG Secretary <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2007 23:56:17 -0400

IESG Agenda

Good approximation of what will be included in the Agenda of next Telechat (2007-10-04).

1. Administrivia

1.1 Roll Call

1.2 Bash the Agenda

1.3 Approval of the Minutes of the past telechat

1.4 List of Remaining Action Items from Last Telechat

2. Protocol Actions

Reviews should focus on these questions: "Is this document a

reasonable basis on which to build the salient part of the Internet

infrastructure? If not, what changes would make it so?"

2.1 WG Submissions

2.1.1 New Item

Area
Date

OPS

Overview of the Internet Multicast Routing Architecture (BCP) - 1 of 4

draft-ietf-mboned-routingarch-10.txt
[Open Web Ballot]

Token:

Ron Bonica

RTG

IS-IS Protocol Extensions for Path Computation Element (PCE) Discovery (Proposed Standard) - 2 of 4

draft-ietf-pce-disco-proto-isis-08.txt
[Open Web Ballot]

Token:

Ross Callon

OPS

Preventing Use of Recursive Nameservers in Reflector Attacks (BCP) - 3 of 4

draft-ietf-dnsop-reflectors-are-evil-04.txt
[Open Web Ballot]

Token:

Ron Bonica

INT

Deprecation of Type 0 Routing Headers in IPv6 (Proposed Standard) - 4 of 4

draft-ietf-ipv6-deprecate-rh0-01.txt
[Open Web Ballot]

Note: Document Shepherd is Bob Hinden <[email-masked]>

Token:

Jari Arkko

2.1.2 Returning Item

Area
Date

OPS

Specification of the IPFIX Protocol for the Exchange of IP Traffic Flow Information (Proposed Standard) - 1 of 2

draft-ietf-ipfix-protocol-26.txt
[Open Web Ballot]

Note: A previous version draft-ietf-ipfix-protocol-24.txt of this draft was
already approved by the IESG. The IPFIX WG decided to make changes to that
version of the document with the principal goal of removing the SCTP
stream 0 restriction. Reviews should focus on the changes since
draft-ietf-ipfix-protocol-24.txt which are mentioned in an editorial note
currently placed after the Table of Contents.

Token:

Dan Romascanu

INT

Multicast Group Membership Discovery MIB (Proposed Standard) - 2 of 2

draft-ietf-magma-mgmd-mib-10.txt
[Open Web Ballot]

Note: Document Shepherd is Brian Haberman

Token:

Jari Arkko

2.2 Individual Submissions

2.2.1 New Item

Area
Date

APP

URI Fragment Identifiers for the text/plain Media Type (Proposed Standard) - 1 of 1

draft-wilde-text-fragment-08.txt
[Open Web Ballot]

Token:

Chris Newman

2.2.2 Returning Item

NONE

3. Document Actions

3.1 WG Submissions

Reviews should focus on these questions: "Is this document a reasonable

contribution to the area of Internet engineering which it covers? If

not, what changes would make it so?"

3.1.1 New Item

NONE

3.1.2 Returning Item

NONE

3.2 Individual Submissions Via AD

Reviews should focus on these questions: "Is this document a reasonable

contribution to the area of Internet engineering which it covers? If

not, what changes would make it so?"

3.2.1 New Item

Area
Date

APP

A Uniform Resource Name (URN) Namespace for the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE) (Informational) - 1 of 3

draft-edwards-urn-smpte-02.txt
[Open Web Ballot]

Token:

Chris Newman

INT

EAP-IKEv2 Method (Experimental) - 2 of 3

draft-tschofenig-eap-ikev2-15.txt
[Open Web Ballot]

Note: There is no Document Shepherd.
Note: LC expires Oct 9, I will take this to the IESG 5 days before that

Token:

Jari Arkko

GEN

Experiment in Study Group Formation within the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) (Experimental) - 3 of 3

draft-aboba-sg-experiment-02.txt
[Open Web Ballot]

Note: No document shepherd.
Note: LC Expires Oct 8, will take this to IESG four days before that

Token:

Jari Arkko

3.2.2 Returning Item

Area
Date

SEC

DNSSEC Lookaside Validation (DLV) IANA Registry (Informational) - 1 of 1

draft-weiler-dnssec-dlv-iana-00.txt
[Open Web Ballot]

Token:

Russ Housley

3.3 Independent Submissions Via RFC Editor

The IESG will use RFC 3932 responses: 1) The IESG has not

found any conflict between this document and IETF work; 2) The

IESG thinks that this work is related to IETF work done in WG

<X>, but this does not prevent publishing; 3) The IESG thinks

that publication is harmful to work in WG <X> and recommends

not publishing at this time; 4) The IESG thinks that this

document violates the IETF procedures for <X> and should

therefore not be published without IETF review and IESG

approval; 5) The IESG thinks that this document extends an

IETF protocol in a way that requires IETF review and should

therefore not be published without IETF review and IESG approval.

The document shepherd must propose one of these responses in

the the Data Tracker note and supply complete text in the IESG

Note portion of the write-up. The Area Director ballot positions

indicate consensus with the response proposed by the

document shepherd.

Other matters may be recorded in comments, and the comments will

be passed on to the RFC Editor as community review of the document.

3.3.1 New Item

NONE

3.3.2 Returning Item

NONE

4. Working Group Actions

4.1 WG Creation

4.1.1 Proposed for IETF Review

Area
Date

APP

Sep 25

HyperText Transport Protocol Bis (httpbis) - 1 of 1

Token:

Lisa

4.1.2 Proposed for Approval

NONE

4.2 WG Rechartering

4.2.1 Under evaluation for IETF Review

Area
Date

INT

Sep 23

Dynamic Host Configuration (dhc) - 1 of 2

Token:

Jari

TSV

Sep 27

Network File System Version 4 (nfsv4) - 2 of 2

Token:

Lars

4.2.2 Proposed for Approval

NONE

5. IAB News We Can Use

6. Management Issues

6.1 IESG Statement about Appeals (Russ Housley)

6.2 Expert for RFC-to-be: draft-ietf-ipfix-info-15.txt [IANA #106002] (Michelle Cotton)

6.3 ion-2026-practice.html (Russ Housley)

7. Working Group News

_______________________________________________
IESG-AGENDA-DIST mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iesg-agenda-dist