3 Wednesday Plenary

Thursday Plenary

Current Meeting Report

Administrative Plenary
Wednesday, 29 July 2009

Minutes by Mirjam Kuehne


   1. Welcome
   2. Host Presentation
   3. Postel Award
   4. Reporting
       - IETF Chair Report
       - NOC Report
       - IAOC Chair & IAD Reports
       - Trust Chair Report
       - NomCom Chair Report
   5. Recognition
   6. IAOC Open Mic
   7. IESG Open Mic

Postel Award

   Lynn St.Amour presents this year's winner of the Jon Postel Award:

   CSNET: for providing the critical bridge from the original research
   undertaken through the ARPANET to the modern Internet.

   Larry Landweber should have been here to receive the award.
   Unfortunately he could not be here due to illness.  Dave Crocker
   accepts the award and announces that the prize money will be
   donated to charities that support the Internet.

IAOC Open Mic

   John Klensin: The report from the Trust indicated that the comment
   period for the Trust Legal Provisiosn (TLP) are closed and that you
   were reviewing the comments.  You got a formal request to change
   that comment period.

   Marshall Eubanks: that will have to be considered on Thursday
   evening when the IETF Trust meets.  There are certain things that
   were not at all controversial.  On the other matters, this touches
   on question if we are going to reorganise the process or not. 

   John Klensin: requests to suspend action until the review has been

   Marshall: that is under way. I don't think we will take an extended
   review period for that (up to 90 days is allowed).

   Keith Drage: question on tools team. When do we expect to see things
   on the tools page updated to align with the updated TLP once it is

   Bob Hinden: We realised that some tools are maintained by the
   Secretariat and some tools are maintained by volunteers.  Different
   procedures are associated with each type of maintenance.

   Russ Housley: the update to the TLP that was sent for review 30 days
   ago needed one sentence to be added to the boilerplate. It is hard
   to know exactly when the updated TLP will be approved, but once that
   happens the tools team will be asked for their estimates to do the
   necessary changes.  We are hoping that this one sentence could get
   done at the same time the other changes required by the IAB headers-
   and-boilerplate document are done, but that might not be possible.

   Keith: Can something be made available on the xml2rfc web page?

   Russ: This is a tool that is maintaind by volunteers.

   Tim Chown: Thanks for the new web site!  Wondering whether the IETF
   would be interested to make all previous T-shirts available.  This
   could also be a way to raise more money.  We could also start to
   design other T-shirts and sell them.

   Bob Hinden: yes, we have been thinking about it, have to ask
   previous hosts to give up the rights to the design of the T-shirts
   and to make them available.  Probably not our highest priority, but
   I agree it would be nice to do.

   Alissa Cooper: wonders whether the IETF Trust intends to publish the
   subpoenas that they receive (as long as they have not been sealed by
   the courts). Suggesting that the IETF be transparent about the
   legal requests that it receives so that the community can know when
   information held by the IETF is being sought in litigation.
   Publishing the requests will likely also deter future requests.

   Marshall: doesn't know if the subpoenas can be published - this would
   have to be answered by the lawyers; he will ask them.

   Margaret Wasserman: thanks for the efforts to publish the backlogged
   IAOC minutes.  The value of having a public record is very high, even
   if not many people are reading it right now.  Encourages to publish
   everything you can (even if it is not very beautiful).  The more
   record we have there, the better in case we need to explain what we
   do ans how we do it.

   Sam Weiler: you might have less subpoenas if you had less data.  I
   would like to encourage you to destroy the archive of all blue

   Bob Hinden: was told that one of the reason to keep blue sheets was
   to have a record of how many people attended certain WGs  This can
   be important since the IETF has no membership.

   Eric Burger: the blue sheets protect us as individuals.

   Margaret: no, don't destroy the blue sheets, don't destroy minutes. 
   Keep it all forever!

   Marshall: yes, that would be my inclination. 

IESG Open Mic

   Spencer Dawkins: something that came up in the ecrit WG regarding
   2427bis.  How do you see that going?  I didn't understand the
   scope of the dispatch WG.

   Cullen Jennings: this is new to the RAI Area. It is a way to speed
   up the work. 

   Spencer: it seems that this running very effectively. Thanks to
   the dispatch chairs to get a lot processed through.

   Glen Zorn: has three drafts in Last Call.  This is the first time in
   a while.  Therefore he was forced to re-subsrcibed to the IETF
   Discussion mail list.  The reason why he unsubscribed was the
   signal-to-noise ratio is too high.  He is annoyed that he has to
   read through all this mail to find comments on his drafts.  Wonders
   if it would be possible to start a new mailing list: something like
   ietf-last-call that only has traffic for IETF Last Call matters.

   Mary Barnes: suggests to send a copy of the comment of the e-mail to
   the author.

   Russ: the reason we do Last Call is to get information flowing
   across Areas.  That is why the Last Call and the resulting comments
   are currently sent to the IETF Discussion mail list. Any change that
   we make must ensure the cross Area review.

   Ross Callon: would encourage to try setting up another mail list for
   Last Call.

   Cullen: we did decide to add the draft name in the subject line so
   people can find comments to their drafts.

   ???: it seems to be his hobby horse to point out social problems
   that are trying to be solved by technical solutions.  In this case
   the social problem is that we don't get a lot of feedback on Last
   Calls.  How should be interpret that?  Do we take that as an
   agreement?  We might want to find out why we don't get a lot of
   feedback before we try to find a technical solution for it.

   Al Morton: wonders if an e-mail list is not the best mechanism,
   maybe a web archive would be useful?

   Russ: we are working on that with the Secretariat.  Better search
   is needed, and we hope to deploy something before the next IETF

   Alain Durand: he also unsubscribed from IETF Discussion mail list.
   Would encourage to set up a separate Last Call mail list.

   Glen Zorn: to clarify: he is not worried about the number of
   comments during Last Call, but about all the other stuff sent to
   the mail list and that is too much to follow.

   Seimo Veikkolainen (???): the meeting-attendees mail lists were a
   good move to reduce the noise on the IETF Discussion mail list.  He
   doesn't think there is too much noise any longer. Easy to filter.

   Joel Jaeggli: spent 25 years reading mail. Somehow he learned to
   manage all the various messages in his inbox and wonders why other
   people cannot.

   Glen Zorn: why would I want to?  Why do I have to learn it?

   Joel: because we are a big, uncoordinated organisation.

   Dave Crocker: Last Call generates spontanous small group
   discussions.  To the extend that archiving is needed, the right
   people get copies of message - all these might be useful things.
   We should find out what communication is needed before we start
   to set up technical solutions. Would be happy to help with that.

   Tim Chown: maybe we should try to enable discussion before the
   Last Call comes out.

   Russ: good point. This is something the IESG has looked at several
   times over the last years. One solution was the creation of the
   IETF Announce list, which includes an announcment for the start of
   each last Call, but none of the discussion takes place on the
   announce mail list.

   Cyrus Daboo: This is a plea to find a technical solution for it
   and a plea to eat our own dog food!

   Russ: asks the audience if they would like to have a new mail
   list just to discuss Last Calls:

    - Who would like to have a new mail list set up: few hums

    - Who would like to keep it on IETF Discussion mail list: more hums

   Decided to keep the Last Call discussion on the IETF Discussion mail

   Barry Leiba: Why not have a RSS and ATOM feeds for each Last Call?
   Then people can subscribe to any feed in which they have interest.

   Russ: even though some of them will never receive a single message?

   Barry: yes

   Russ: ok, this idea is worth thinking about.


Logo and Note Well
Host Presentation
Postel Award
IETF Chair Report
IETF Chair Report Wrapup
NOC Report
IAOC Chair and IAD Report
IETF Trust Chair Report
NomCom Chair Report
Recognition: Steve Coya