Narrative Minutes interim-2019-iesg-05 2019-02-21 15:00
narrative-minutes-interim-2019-iesg-05-201902211500-00

INTERNET ENGINEERING STEERING GROUP (IESG)
Narrative minutes for the 2019-02-21 IESG Teleconference

These are not an official record of the meeting.
Narrative Scribe: Liz Flynn, Secretariat

1. Administrivia
1.1 Roll call

ATTENDEES
---------------------------------
Ignas Bagdonas (Equinix) /  Operations and Management Area
Deborah Brungard (AT&T) / Routing Area
Ben Campbell (Oracle) / Applications and Real-Time Area
Alissa Cooper (Cisco) / IETF Chair, General Area
Michelle Cotton (ICANN) / IANA Liaison
Roman Danyliw (CERT/SEI) / Incoming Security Area
Spencer Dawkins (Wonder Hamster Internetworking) / Transport Area
Liz Flynn (AMS) / IETF Secretariat, Narrative Scribe
Sandy Ginoza (AMS) / RFC Editor Liaison
Ted Hardie (Google) / IAB Chair
Suresh Krishnan (Kaloom) / Internet Area
Mirja Kuehlewind (ETH Zurich) / Transport Area
Warren Kumari (Google) / Operations and Management Area
Barry Leiba (Huawei) / Incoming Applications and Real-Time Area
Alexey Melnikov / Applications and Real-Time Area
Cindy Morgan (AMS) / IETF Secretariat
Colin Perkins / incoming IRTF Chair
Eric Rescorla (Mozilla) / Security Area
Alvaro Retana (Huawei) / Routing Area
Adam Roach (Mozilla) / Applications and Real-Time Area
Jeff Tantsura (Apstra) / IAB Liaison
Martin Vigoureux (Nokia) / Routing Area
Amy Vezza (AMS) / IETF Secretariat
Magnus Westerlund (Ericsson) / Incoming Transport Area

REGRETS
---------------------------------
Heather Flanagan / RFC Series Editor
Benjamin Kaduk (Akamai Technologies) / Security Area
Terry Manderson (ICANN) / Internet Area
Portia Wenze-Danley (ISOC) / Interim LLC Executive Director
Eric Vyncke (Cisco) / Incoming Internet Area

OBSERVERS
---------------------------------
Greg Wood
Dan York

1.2 Bash the agenda

Amy: Any additions or changes to today's agenda?  We did get a late breaking
defer, which I will call out when we get there.

1.3 Approval of the minutes of past telechats

Amy: Does anyone have an objection to approving the minutes from February 7?
Hearing no objection, we will get those posted. Any objection to approving the
narrative minutes from February 7? Hearing no objection, so we will get those
posted too.

1.4 List of remaining action items from last telechat

     o Alvaro Retana to send email to the IESG with proposed re-labeling of
     scheduling conflicts.

Alvaro: Some progress.

     o Suresh Krishnan to discuss naming experts for the registries created by
     draft-irtf-icnrg-ccnxsemantics with Allison Mankin.

Suresh: I've had initial conversations with Allison and she promised to discuss
this with IRSG and get back to me. Keep it in progress, but the ball is with
the IRSG at this point. I assume at some point I need to transfer this to Colin.

     o Ben Campbell to write up text on the IESG's expectations regarding
     conflicts of interest and the disclosure of funding sources.

Ben: Still in progress.

     o Warren Kumari and Spencer Dawkins to develop the spherical routing topic.

Warren: We're still kind of working. It's worth keeping here so we don't
forget, but it's moving along and on the agenda for Prague.

     o Suresh Krishnan to draft a new proposed IESG Statement on the procedure
     to reference material behind a paywall, that includes the existing text
     and adds comments from the discussion, Eric Rescorla, and Barry Leiba.

Suresh: It's in progress. I'll get to that today.

     o Alissa Cooper to schedule a discussion about selecting the IESG's
     liaison to the IAB.

Alissa: I was hoping we could talk about this right now. Originally I was
thinking we could do this next week on the informal. I'm actually going to miss
the informal, which is not necessarily a problem; people can organize this
themselves if they want to. Or we could do it in two weeks if people think I
should be around. The other question is that we usually go through all the
liaison positions at once, and sometimes if there are multiple people
interested in one but only one person interested in the others, it's useful to
do them all at once. This includes tools, nomcom, EDU, mailing list
administrators. We could do those all together in two weeks and people can
think about what roles they might be interested in.

Barry: The reason we were going to do it quickly was to see if we could affect
the dates of the IAB retreat based on who the liaison was. Given that we can't
do that, I don't really care when we do it.

Alissa: I'm not sure it it was affecting the dates, but the person does need to
make it there so the person does need to know sooner rather than later. Do
people still want to do this before 104 or do you want to do it there?

Warren: I'm fine for waiting.

Alissa: It's already on the agenda for IETF 104 Sunday. So we can leave it
there and mark this as done.

      o Roman Danyliw and Barry Leiba to identify and catalogue common
      problematic and inappropriate behaviors from individuals in the IETF
      community both at in-person meetings and on email lists.

Barry: In progress.

2. Protocol actions
2.1 WG submissions
2.1.1 New items

 o draft-ietf-rtcweb-fec-08  - IETF stream
   WebRTC Forward Error Correction Requirements (Proposed Standard)
   Token: Adam Roach

Amy: I have no Discusses for this document so unless there's an objection it
looks like this one is approved.

Adam: Yes, and we're going to want a new version.

 o draft-ietf-perc-srtp-ekt-diet-09  - IETF stream
   Encrypted Key Transport for DTLS and Secure RTP (Proposed Standard)
   Token: Ben Campbell

Amy: I have a couple of Discusses. Do we need to discuss those today?

Ben: I think I mainly need to get Richard and others to respond to the
Discusses so we can have some discussion. Unless somebody has something they
want to talk about right now, I think we can move on and discuss this by email.
It will almost certainly require a new version, though.

 o draft-ietf-detnet-architecture-11  - IETF stream
   Deterministic Networking Architecture (Proposed Standard)
   Token: Deborah Brungard

Amy: I have a number of Discusses. Do we need to discuss those today?

Deborah: I don't think so. The discussion is going on online but if anyone
wants to, we can.

Amy: That sounds like it's IESG Evaluation, Revised ID Needed.

Deborah: Yes.

 o draft-ietf-tsvwg-le-phb-09 (Has RFC Editor Note)  - IETF stream
   A Lower Effort Per-Hop Behavior (LE PHB) (Proposed Standard)
   Token: Spencer Dawkins

Amy: I have a couple of open positions. Ekr, did you want to state a position?

Ekr: I haven't read it.

Amy: Okay. There are no Discusses in the tracker so if there's no objection it
looks like this is approved. Hearing no objection, so this document is
approved. Spencer, can you check that the ballot writeup and RFC Editor notes
are appropriate?

Spencer: It's a Revised ID Needed also.

 o draft-ietf-jmap-core-14  - IETF stream
   JSON Meta Application Protocol (Proposed Standard)
   Token: Alexey Melnikov

Amy: I have a number of Discusses. Do we need to discuss those today?

Alexey: I don't think so, unless people want to. I think discusses filed
earlier got responses so there's a dialogue going. I'd like the author and WG
to respond to these.

Adam: Benjamin isn't on the call but one of the items in my Discuss is security
related, so I wanted to flag it for Ekr to see if he could look at it and tell
me if I'm off in the weeds or if this is a genuine concern.

Ekr: Let me take a look.

Adam: It's the middle one citing section 8.3. Just wanted to flag it so we
could follow up in email.

Amy: So it sounds like this will require a revised ID.

Alexey: I think so, yes.

 o draft-ietf-jmap-mail-14  - IETF stream
   JMAP for Mail (Proposed Standard)
   Token: Alexey Melnikov

Amy: I have a couple of Discusses. Do we need to discuss those today?

Alexey: I don't think so. These are relatively trivial. It will need a new
revision though.

Amy: This will stay in IESG Evaluation, Revised ID Needed.

 o draft-ietf-uta-smtp-require-tls-07  - IETF stream
   SMTP Require TLS Option (Proposed Standard)
   Token: Alexey Melnikov

Amy: This document was deferred about an hour ago so we'll pick that up on
March 7.

 o draft-ietf-payload-flexible-fec-scheme-17  - IETF stream
   RTP Payload Format for Flexible Forward Error Correction (FEC)
   (Proposed Standard)
   Token: Ben Campbell

Amy: I have a Discuss in the tracker. Do we need to discuss that today? I don't
think your Discuss holder is here.

Ben: Benjamin isn't here. There was a response earlier today and I need to hear
from the authors so I think we'll handle this by email. I do think it will
require a Revised ID; several people expressed confusion about a concept that
can be clarified.

Amy: Okay; this will stay in IESG Evaluation, Revised ID Needed.

2.1.2 Returning items

 NONE

2.2 Individual submissions
2.2.1 New items

 o draft-nottingham-rfc5785bis-08  - IETF stream
   Well-Known Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs) (Proposed Standard)
   Token: Alexey Melnikov

Amy: I have a Discuss in the tracker and unfortunately your Discuss holder is
not here to discuss it.

Alexey: This needs a response from the author. I suspect this will need a new
revision, considering all the comments.

2.2.2 Returning items

 NONE

2.3 Status changes
2.3.1 New items

 NONE

2.3.2 Returning items

 NONE

3. Document actions
3.1 WG submissions
3.1.1 New items

 o draft-ietf-dmm-ondemand-mobility-16  - IETF stream
   On Demand Mobility Management (Informational)
   Token: Suresh Krishnan

Amy: I have no consensus here. Should that be yes?

Suresh: Yes please, thank you.

Amy: I have a couple of Discusses; do we need to discuss either of those today?

Suresh: Not exactly. Alissa and Mirja both have fair points. Mirja's point has
been discussed before and the current version of the document is opposite of
what she wanted and we need to have that discussion with the author and WG, and
we'll do this over email. Alissa's thing is easier to fix and we'll do that
over email too.

Amy: So it sounds like you'll need a revision?

Suresh: For sure, yes.

 o draft-ietf-dots-requirements-18  - IETF stream
   Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) Open Threat Signaling
   Requirements (Informational)
   Token: Benjamin Kaduk

Amy: I have no consensus for this document either. Do we think this is yes or
should we wait and ask Benjamin directly?

Ekr: I would imagine it's yes, but since it has Discusses anyway we can sort it
out later.

Amy: So it sounds like this one has some work ahead of it and we'll let
Benjamin pick that up later and we'll put this into Revised ID Needed.

Roman: Benjamin and I talked; this definitely needs a Revised ID.

Amy: Did you have any feeling on whether the consensus should be yes?

Roman: That's my unofficial feeling.

Amy: Okay, we'll let Benjamin do that.

3.1.2 Returning items

 NONE

3.2 Individual submissions via AD
3.2.1 New items

 NONE

3.2.2 Returning items

 NONE

3.3 Status changes
3.3.1 New items

 NONE

3.3.2 Returning items

 NONE

3.4 IRTF and Independent Submission stream documents
3.4.1 New items

 o conflict-review-jenkins-cnsa-cert-crl-profile-00
   IETF conflict review for draft-jenkins-cnsa-cert-crl-profile
     draft-jenkins-cnsa-cert-crl-profile-06
     Commercial National Security Algorithm (CNSA) Suite Certificate
   and Certificate Revocation List (CRL) Profile (ISE: Informational)
   Token: Benjamin Kaduk

Amy: I have no Discusses for this conflict review so unless there's an
objection this message can go back to the ISE. Hearing no objection, so we'll
do so.

 o conflict-review-vandesompel-citeas-00
   IETF conflict review for draft-vandesompel-citeas
     draft-vandesompel-citeas-04
     cite-as: A Link Relation to Convey a Preferred URI for
   Referencing (ISE: Informational)
   Token: Alexey Melnikov

Amy: I have no Discusses for this conflict review so unless there's an
objection is approved too. Hearing no objection, we'll get that sent as well.

3.4.2 Returning items

 NONE

4. Working Group actions
4.1 WG creation
4.1.1 Proposed for IETF review

 NONE

4.1.2 Proposed for approval

 NONE

4.2 WG rechartering
4.2.1 Under evaluation for IETF review

 NONE

4.2.2 Proposed for approval

 NONE

5. IAB news we can use

Deborah: None that I can recall. I don't think there's any technical plenary
being planned, right?

Ted: There's a suggestion from Brian Trammell to discuss shifting what the IAB
does here to run meetings during the week which are not intended to be of use
to the entire community, but are technical topics that would gather some
cross-area discussion or attention. But I think for this plenary there won't be
one again. We keep setting the bar high not to waste peoples' time, and the
result of that is that when we find someone good enough, scheduling becomes a
problem, and blah blah blah. We can discuss that at the joint meeting.

6. Management issues

6.1 Removal of 2 very old registries (gstn-info and publisher-id) (IANA)

Michelle: I sent email to the IESG list and there seemed to be no issues with
removing these very old registries. We ddid get confirmation from some experts
that they were not needed anymore. Just checking with the IESG to see if anyone
has objections. If not, can the Secretariat send us a message confirming the
IESG had no issues, and we'll take care of it.

Amy: Hearing no objection to removing these extremely old registries, so it
sounds like the IESG approves and we will put together an official note to
authorize IANA to remove them.

6.2 IETF 104 Preliminary Agenda Conflict Resolution (Liz Flynn)

The IESG worked with Liz Flynn to resolve conflicts in the pre-preliminary IETF
104 agenda.

6.3 Executive Session: Confirmation of IAB appointment to ISOC BoT (Spencer
Dawkins)

The management issue was discussed in an executive session. The IESG confirmed
the IAB's candidate for the Internet Society Board of Trustees.

7. Any Other Business (WG News, New Proposals, etc.)