Subject: RE: krb-wg Agenda for 58th IETF - draft 0.5 (fwd)

From: Jeffrey Hutzelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 16:29:03 -0500

This was my original response to Eric, which I failed to copy to the list 
at the time.

At this point, it's beginning to look like the best option is to set aside 
the Tuesday meeting slot for PKINIT and preauth issues, and possibly some 
discussion of GSSAPI-CFX, and ask for another slot to handle the other 
issues.

Comments?  I need to send in the request tomorrow morning at the latest.

-- Jeff

---------- Forwarded Message ----------
Date: Monday, October 27, 2003 15:20:28 -0500
From: Jeffrey Hutzelman <[email-masked]>
To: Eric Rosenfeld <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: krb-wg Agenda for 58th IETF - draft 0.5

On Monday, October 27, 2003 12:46:28 -0700 Eric Rosenfeld
<[email-masked]> wrote:

> I thought the time slot has already been set (Tuesday, 14:15 - 15:15). I
> would object to changing the time slot.

Can I ask the reason for your objection?

That time slot is shown in the draft agenda, but the scheduling process is
not complete yet, and things still can (and will) change.  Unfortunately,
that slot is not sufficient for our needs -- it's only an hour long, and
our agenda has grown from 65 minutes to 115.  If we want to continue to
make forward progress, we need this meeting time to resolve a number of
issues.

At this point, it seems that our choices are
(1) Ask for a longer time slot.  That pretty much means moving to another
day, since the only longer slot on Tuesday is the morning slot, which would
mean a conflict with another WG we've been asked to avoid.

(2) Ask for an additional slot.  The only other 1-hour slots are also
Tuesday afternoon, and it's unlikely we'll get one, given the number of
other security-area sessions meeting then (we have one, SASL does, SECSH is
in the pipeline, not to mention SMIME and the ENROLL BOF).  So any
additional slot would be one of the same choices available under option 1
(BTW, we don't get to choose a slot -- the secretariat assigns time slots
based on requirements).

(3) drastically trim the agenda, and not actually accomplish anything
during the meeting.  This is likely to have a serious impact on the
progress of our work items, including kerberos-extensions and PKINIT.

Given these choices, I am leaning heavily in favor of option (1).  I can
try option (2), with the PKINIT-related items occuring during the Tuesday
time slot, but I need some reason to justify the allocation of two time
slots.

-- Jeff

---------- End Forwarded Message ----------

---

From: Jeffrey Hutzelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 10:49:47 -0500

On Monday, October 27, 2003 16:29:03 -0500 Jeffrey Hutzelman 
<[email-masked]> wrote:

> At this point, it's beginning to look like the best option is to set
> aside the Tuesday meeting slot for PKINIT and preauth issues, and
> possibly some discussion of GSSAPI-CFX, and ask for another slot to
> handle the other issues.
>

If I don't hear any objection in the next hour, this is what I'm going to 
do.

-- Jeff