Subject: krb-wg interim meeting in September 2005

From: "Liqiang(Larry) Zhu" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 11:01:15 -0700

At Minneapolis, a few active participants expressed strong interests in
having interim working group meeting given the amount of workload this
working group needs to finish.

JK and I would like to host such a meeting at Redmond in the week of
9/19-9/23. Any body who can attend is welcome to do interop tests with
our LH release since we will also organize an interop event at the same
week.

At similar events in the past, we were able to pin down and addressed
issues that are hard to track down when we have developers from both
sides sitting in the same room.

As requested by the chair Jeff, I want to get a poll whether you can
attend this event or if not, what time would work better for you. 

Please send your response to Jeff, JK and me, and I will compile and
post the results. 

Thanks,

-- Larry

---

From: Jeffrey Hutzelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2005 14:11:57 -0400

> attend this event or if not, what time would work better for you.

Note that this is not a done deal.  Discussions as to whether we need such 
a meeting and what work would get done there are very much on-topic.  I'd 
ask folks to please hold such discussion on the list, rather than in 
private mail.

-- Jeff

---

From: Jeffrey Hutzelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 19:10:25 -0400

On Monday, June 06, 2005 02:11:57 PM -0400 Jeffrey Hutzelman 
<[email-masked]> wrote:

> Note that this is not a done deal.  Discussions as to whether we need
> such a meeting and what work would get done there are very much on-topic.
> I'd ask folks to please hold such discussion on the list, rather than in
> private mail.

I haven't seen any discussion or comments, nor have I gotten anything in 
private mail.  No comments is not a very good basis on which to plan an 
interim meeting...

-- Jeff

---

From: Ken Raeburn <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 21:27:32 -0400

On Jun 10, 2005, at 19:10, Jeffrey Hutzelman wrote:
> I haven't seen any discussion or comments, nor have I gotten anything 
> in private mail.  No comments is not a very good basis on which to 
> plan an interim meeting...

Seems kind of odd to be planning an interim meeting three months out 
while we're still a bit over a month away from IETF 63.  If there's 
stuff that needs to be worked out in person, perhaps we can do it at 
the regularly scheduled conference?  If there's too much stuff to do 
during that week -- WG meetings, plus hallway/bar time for design teams 
-- *then* maybe an interim meeting makes sense.  (See also Jeff's plea 
for scheduling technical discussions and not presentations for the WG 
meeting.)

Ken

---

From: Sam Hartman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2005 01:04:17 -0400

I think I and the MIT folks can probably attend this meeting.

I'd like to propose the following agenda and I think people may see why it would not fit well into IETF 63:

I'd like to schedule the necessary work to get a test matrix together
to advance RFC 3961, 3962, 4120 and 4121 to draft standard.  (The last
two are clarifications and CFX--CFX probably can't advance right now
because of GSS base and 1964).

I believe that doing this work in the context of an WG meeting would
be appropriate.  I believe the work needs to get done.

I also think having this along side a dedicated large chunk of time
where we could actually test to see if we all meet the test matrix
would be wonderful.

--Sam

---

From: Jeffrey Altman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 23:59:05 -0400

> where we could actually test to see if we all meet the test matrix

Sam and Larry:

I think this is a perfect justification for holding an interim meeting.
I plan to attend.

Jeffrey Altman

---

From: Love Hörnquist Åstrand <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 14:46:49 +0200

> I think this is a perfect justification for holding an interim meeting.

Having a interim meeting for this seems like a fine idea.

Love