Skip to main content

Minutes interim-1993-iesg-11 1993-04-15 15:30
minutes-interim-1993-iesg-11-199304151530-00

Meeting Minutes Internet Engineering Steering Group (iesg) IETF
Date and time 1993-04-15 15:30
Title Minutes interim-1993-iesg-11 1993-04-15 15:30
State (None)
Other versions plain text
Last updated 2024-02-23

minutes-interim-1993-iesg-11-199304151530-00
											
Minutes of the IESG Teleconferences

    IETF STEERING GROUP (IESG)

    REPORT FROM THE IETF MEETING

    April 15th, 1993

    Reported by: Greg Vaudreuil, IESG Secretary

    This report contains IESG meeting notes, positions and action items.

    These minutes were compiled by the IETF Secretariat which is supported
    by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. NCR 8820945.

    For more information please contact the IESG Secretary.
    iesg-secretary@cnri.reston.va.us.

    ATTENDEES
    ---------

    Bradner, Scott / Harvard
    Chapin, Lyman / BBN
    Coya, Steve / CNRI
    Crocker, Dave / SGI
    Crocker, Steve / TIS
    Gross, Phillip / ANS
    Hinden, Robert / SUN
    Kahle, Brewster / WAIS
    Knowles, Stev / FTP Software
    Piscitello, Dave/ Bellcore
    Rose, Marshall / DBC
    Vaudreuil, Greg / CNRI

    Regrets
    Huizer, Erik / SURFnet
    Mankin, Allison / Locus
    Reynolds, Joyce / ISI
    Stockman, Bernhard / SUNET/NORDUnet

    IAB Liaison
    Christian Huitema / INRIA

    AGENDA
    ------

    1. Administrivia

    o Roll Call
    o Bash the Agenda
    o Approval of minutes
    - April 8th

    2. Protocol Actions

    o X.400 Routing Coordination
    o Distributed Authentication Security Service

    3. Working Group Actions

    o Modem Management (modemmgt)
    o Character MIB (charmib)
    o DECnet Phase IV MIB (decnetiv)
    o AToM MIB (atommib)

    4. Tasked Items

    o RIP A/S
    o Revised IPLPDN Working Group Charter

    5. Management Issues

    o Alignment of the Working Groups
    o Informal operations review of Internet Drafts
    o Compressing TCP/IP Headers
    o DHC -- Status check
    o Requirements for Draft Standard -
    Implementation of the IESG policy

    MINUTES
    -------

    1) Administrivia

    o Approval of the Minutes

    With corrections, the minutes of the April 8th teleconference were
    approved.

    o Next Meeting

    In an effort to reduce the time demands on IESG members, the next
    meeting was scheduled for April 29th.

    2) Protocol Actions

    o X.400 Routing Coordination

    In the absence of Eric Huizer, this document was not reviewed.

    o Distributed Authentication Security Service

    The DASS work was submitted by the CAT work for consideration as an
    Experimental Protocol. This effort was initially intended to be on
    the standards track but the group has requested Experimental because
    the development effort lost funding.

    This work was originally developed within DEC and it is unclear
    whether there are still intellectual property claims on this work.
    Efforts were initiated to secure a letter of release but the current
    status is unknown. As an experimental protocol a formal release is
    not needed, but the RFC should indicate any Intellectual Property
    rights claims on the content.

    ACTION: Coya -- Inquire with Jon Postel and Vint Cerf about the current
    requirements for the intellectual property rights declaration on
    non-standards track RFCs.

    ACTION: SCrocker -- Clarify with the authors of the DASS document the
    status of any intellectual property right claims.

    3) Working Group Actions

    o Modem Management (modemmgt)

    The IESG reviewed and approved the Modem Management Working Group
    charter. This group met at the Columbus IETF meeting as a BOF. The
    group intends to maintain liaisons with several external
    organizations but has been discouraged from operating a lock-step
    manner.

    ACTION: Vaudreuil -- Announce the formation of the Modem Management
    Working Group to the IETF list.

    o Character MIB

    The new Character MIB Working Group charter was approved. This
    Working Group was rechartered to review the current standardization
    status of the several character MIBs.

    ACTION: Vaudreuil -- Announce the re-formation of the Character MIB
    Working Group.

    o DECNet Phase IV MIB

    The new DECNet Phase IV MIB Working Group charter was approved.
    This Working Group was rechartered to review the current
    standardization status of the several character MIBs.

    ACTION: Vaudreuil -- Announce the re-formation of the DECNet Phase IV
    MIB Working Group.

    o ATM MIB (atommib)

    The IESG approved the charter for the ATM MIB Working Group. This
    group is expected to be long lived given the evolving ATM standards
    the many layers of the ATM protocol.

    ACTION: Vaudreuil -- Announce the formation of the ATM MIB Working
    Group.

    The ATM MIB is one of several MIBs based on the aging Interfaces
    group. The Interfaces group was written with a bit of a simplistic
    model which does not work well with virtual circuit and tunneling
    technologies. A new Working Group is being formed to revisit the
    Interfaces group. The work of the ATM MIB group will be aligned
    with the resulting new model and MIB.

    4) Tasked Items

    o RIP A/S

    No progress to report.

    o IPLPDN Charter.

    Discussions on the future scope of the IPLPDN Working Group are
    continuing.

    5) Management Issues

    o Alignment of Working Groups

    Due to limited time in the IESG meeting, a review will be conducted
    by email for approval of the current alignment of Working Groups
    into the re-staffed IESG areas.

    ACTION: Vaudreuil -- Send out the current Working Group summary to
    confirm the current Working Group and Area alignments.

    o Operational Requirements Review of Internet Drafts

    An informal review of all Internet Draft is being conducted in the
    Operations Area. This effort focus on evaluating the operational
    impact of new proposals and feeding comments back to the authors.
    This function is separate from but is expected to be included into
    the scope of the Operations Area Directorate when finalized.

    This review is being done on an experimental basis to gauge whether
    the comprehensive review of proposals will have a benefits worth the
    effort. Suggestions were made to publish a list of operational
    criteria by which the proposals will be measured. Other ideas
    included a dedicated section in the RFCs similar to the security
    considerations section identifying possible operational impacts.

    The IESG has discussed several "considerations" sections in the past
    and discussion of the proposed "operational considerations" section
    was deferred until a list of all such sections discussed by the IESG
    could be gathered.

    ACTION: Vaudreuil -- Get all the IESG discussions on various
    "considerations" sections together for review at a future
    teleconference.

    o Compressing IP headers

    Allison Mankin was not present to give a status update.

    o Dynamic Host Configuration

    The Working Group has worked out a few bugs and the area director
    has pressed the group to get the current version out as a Proposed
    Standard. The editing cycle is continuing too long. Revisions are
    possible as the proposals go to draft standard.

    o Requirements for Draft Standard

    The IESG continued a discussion from the last meeting to refine the
    requirements for a protocol to be advanced to Draft Standard. After
    a bit of discussion, the following requirements was made.

    POSITION: ALL protocols being considered for Draft Standard status
    must have at least two implementations, each of which supports all
    features and options and between which all features and options have
    been tested. Features and options which have been speicified for
    future use but which have not been tested must be removed from the
    specification prior to advancement to Draft Standard.

    The IESG earlier adopted a position that all protocols eligible for
    advancement to Draft Standard be presented to an IETF plenary. With
    the growing number of protocols, the growing size of the IETF
    including mailing list only participants, the reduced frequency of
    meetings, and the use of the last call procedure, this requirement
    has been lifted.

    POSITION: Unless requested by an Area Director, it is no longer
    expected that a plenary presentation be made for each protocol under
    consideration for Draft Standard.

    Currently it is possible to standardize multiple competing
    protocols. The IESG discussed the cost to vendors and providers who
    must support each of the protocols and considered a proposal that
    only one protocol for a given function be allowed to reach Standard
    status. The IESG did not agree on this idea but did affirm that
    the goal is to have one protocol per function. It may be reasonable
    to have multiple protocols that perform a function such as a
    generalized protocol with many features and a limited protocol
    optimized for a particular situation.

    o Wide Area Routing with RIP

    This may be a topic for the routing work the IPLPDN Working Group
    was originally chartered to do. The Internet Area agreed to review
    the protocol analysis for assignment.

    o Frame Relay Service MIB WG

    The Frame Relay Service MIB effort will be defining managed objects
    for service management, rather than device management--a new area
    for IETF standardization. The IESG briefly discussed the proposed
    working group scope and management along with the Competing
    technical approaches that were being pursued. There was also
    discussion on which area this effort should be placed under, who
    should be named chair. The IESG agreed that the handling, to date,
    was acceptable, and further agreed that this effort should be placed
    in the Network Management area, with a neutral party named as
    chair.

    Appendix -- Summary of Action Items Assigned

    ACTION: Coya -- Inquire with Jon Postel and Vint Cerf about the current
    requirements for the intellectual property rights declaration on
    non-standards track RFCs.

    ACTION: SCrocker -- Clarify with the authors of the DASS document the
    status of any intellectual property right claims.

    ACTION: Vaudreuil -- Announce the formation of the Modem Management
    Working Group to the IETF list.

    ACTION: Vaudreuil -- Announce the re-formation of the Character MIB
    Working Group.

    ACTION: Vaudreuil -- Announce the re-formation of the DECNet Phase IV
    MIB Working Group.

    ACTION: Vaudreuil -- Announce the formation of the ATM MIB Working
    Group.

    ACTION: Vaudreuil -- Send out the current Working Group summary to
    confirm the current Working Group and Area alignments.

    ACTION: Vaudreuil -- Get all the IESG discussions on various
    "considerations" sections together for review at a future
    teleconference.

    Appendix -- Summary of Positions Taken

    POSITION: ALL protocols being considered for Draft Standard status
    must have at least two implementations, each of which supports all
    features and options and between which all features and options have
    been tested. Features and options which have been speicified for
    future use but which have not been tested must be removed from the
    specification prior to advancement to Draft Standard.

    POSITION: Unless requested by an Area Director, it is no longer
    expected that a plenary presentation be made for each protocol under
    consideration for Draft Standard.