

NONE

2.2 Individual Submissions
2.2.1 New Item
NONE
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
  o draft-ietf-hokey-reauth-ps-07.txt
    Handover Key Management and Re-authentication Problem Statement 
    (Informational) - 1 of 3 
    Token: Tim Polk
  o draft-ietf-v6ops-addr-select-ps-03.txt
    Problem Statement of Default Address Selection in Multi-prefix Environment: 
    Operational Issues of RFC3484 Default Rules (Informational) - 2 of 3 
    Token: Ron Bonica
  o draft-ietf-v6ops-addr-select-req-04.txt
    Requirements for address selection mechanisms (Informational) - 3 of 3 
    Token: Ron Bonica

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
NONE
3.2.2 Returning Item
NONE
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	therefore not be published without IETF review and IESG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	therefore not be published without IETF review and IESG approval.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 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
    NONE
4.1.2 Proposed for Approval
  o Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks (roll) - 1 of 1
    Token: David
4.2 WG Rechartering
4.2.1 Under evaluation for IETF Review
    NONE
4.2.2 Proposed for Approval
  o Public-Key Infrastructure (X.509) (pkix) - 1 of 1
    Token: Tim

5. IAB News We can use

6. Management Issue

 6.1 RFC Errata (Russ Housley)

 6.2 Clarification of registration procedures for RFC 3688 (Michelle Cotton)

 6.3 Should RFC 1701 be updated/obsoleted by RFC 2784? (Russ Housley)

 6.4 URN allocation following RFC 3688 in an IRTF document (Dan Romascanu)

7. Agenda Working Group News

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