OPsec WG Minutes
-------------------

Thursday afternoon
IETF65-Dallas, March 2006.


1. Pat Cain called the meeting to order.


2. Agenda
         - introductions and housekeeping
         - document and WG status
         - adjusted milestones
         - Discussion of profile documents
         - Adjourning

3. Introductions and Housekeeping.

   Scribe and Note taker discovery:
         - George Jones agreed to be the jabber scribe
         - Ross Callon agreed to take minutes (Pat will when Ross is presenting)
   Slides are accessible from the IETF agenda web site

4. Document and WG Status.

- Pat and Ross went through the issued documents and their status. No new 
  issues were raised.
- A handful of people acknowledged reading the security practices doc.
- During the current practices discussion, and is it finished? talk:
	George Jones: The capabilities documents need to point back to this
		document to add justification to the capabilities. To do this, 
		this doc may need more cleanup.
	Merike: Due to the topic, this document really can't get more granular.
	George: Maybe we can walk thru the filtering draft as an example 
       		and see if it works.
- The miscellaneous capabilities doc:
	Ross:	The misc-caps document will stay as "real draft" as it should
		collect all the stuff that doesn't fit into other stuff.
- Pat has volunteered to draft a first version of the logging document.


Darren Lewis, Cisco: Regarding interface capabilities document: hopefully 
  encourage people to follow these capabilities. Reduce operators' effort. The 
  latter is important.

- A brief discussion was held on our lack of authors. [At the end of the session two authors volunteered. :)]
 
5. Adjusted Milestones.

- Ross went through the proposed updated milestones. In summary, the intention
  is to update the milestones in the working group charter to remove the
  deliberations draft, and to move other drafts to more realistic dates. Ross 
  will summarize the proposed new milestone dates in an email to the working 
  group email list for comment.
- The sense of the room was that the dates were okay.

6. Discussion of profile documents.

- Pat led a short discussion of profiles. While there was some comments expressed that profiles are important, to date no one has volunteered to serve as an editor for the profile documents. So should they be done?
- Many people agreed that they are important.

Darren Lewis: For the purpose of the profiles, is there a working definition of 
 	the difference between an ISP and an enterprise? 

	Pat: We sort of have an idea, but it has not been written down yet. 

Darren: An ISP is an explicit permit, and an Enterprise is an explicit deny.

	Pat: This is probably not a perfect definition. 

	George: We need to get three or four things nailed down that we are
		thinking about before we start detailed profile discussions.

Red Seeley, from AS #1239. We should go to NANOG and do a BOF there.

	Multiple people pointed out that we already went this route.

Darren Lewis: Maybe we should do the route again, but not do a 'read the docs'
	but rather a 'why this is worthwhile for you' and 'why you should care
	about it'. Kind of like a value prop.

- A discussion on other profiles that would be useful started.

Scott Librant: ISPs are in the business of providing Internet Connectivity for every one else; enterprises are in a different business ("Making widgets"), and use the network only as a way to get their real job done. The profiles need to be different.

Ross suggested that we could take on additional tasks if people thought that there were other tasks that should be pursued. There was a comment that we don't have authors of the documents currently in the charter. It was generally suggested that we wouldn't take on additional work unless there is a volunteer to lead the work plus a draft document.

David Kessens (via jabber):  Let's finish what we have before we take on any new stuff.
	
	Co-chairs agree.

7. Other issues

This was followed by a general discussion of working group status, and how to increase operator involvement in the working group. We discussed the possibility of holding working sessions in operator environments, such as at NANOG meetings.

8. Adjourn.
	
Submitted by Pat Cain.