Subject: IETF 98 Preliminary Agenda

From: IETF Agenda <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2017 14:55:01 -0800

The IETF 98 preliminary agenda has been posted. The final agenda will be published on Friday, March 3, 2017.  

If you would like to request a change to the preliminary agenda, please send a message to [email-masked] and copy all relevant Area Directors.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/98/agenda.html
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/98/agenda.txt

Thank you!

IETF Secretariat

---

From: Barry Leiba <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2017 20:31:25 -0800

It seems likely that ACE has some participants who also ought be at
DISPATCH, so it might be good to deconflict them.

UTA is a heavily Sec-related ART group, so it seems that having it in
conflict with a Sec BoF (teep) isn't great.

I'd like to avoid removing all Sec people from JMAP (by having JMAP
and SAAG conflict).  On the other hand, as it'll be the very start of
the JMAP work, we can probably tolerate that, and bring the Sec people
in later.

Barry

---

From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2017 14:40:40 +0000

Hi Barry,

> On 26 Feb 2017, at 04:31, Barry Leiba <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 

I don't think overlap is going to be that great. But if it helps, we can swap UTA with CORE (same day, previous slot)?
> the JMAP work, we can probably tolerate that, and bring the Sec people

Yes, this is unfortunate, but liveable.

---

From: Carsten Bormann <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 07:10:24 +0100

I believe the TEEP BOF should be of very high interest to the CORE audience, so this would be unfortunate.

Grüße, Carsten

> On 26 Feb 2017, at 15:40, Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> we can swap UTA with CORE

---

From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 09:41:02 +0000

> On 27 Feb 2017, at 06:10, Carsten Bormann <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 

Thank you for bring this up. Yes, TEEP/CORE conflict is worse than TEEP/UTA conflict. So I am tempted to leave this as is.

---

From: Michael Richardson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 09:25:31 -0500

> I don't think overlap is going to be that great. But if it helps, we
    > can swap UTA with CORE (same day, previous slot)?

So teep and core would overlap?  That seems worse to me.
(certainly for me)

--
Michael Richardson <[email-masked]>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

---

From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 14:39:25 +0000

Sent from my iPhone

> On 27 Feb 2017, at 14:25, Michael Richardson <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> 

No: currently TEEP and UTA overlap and I suggest no change.