[apps-discuss] draft IETF 80 minutes
Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> Thu, 14 April 2011 02:50 UTC
Return-Path: <stpeter@stpeter.im>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfc.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfc.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B324E0668 for <apps-discuss@ietfc.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 19:50:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NA1QZd1YZbkp for <apps-discuss@ietfc.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 19:50:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stpeter.im (stpeter.im [207.210.219.233]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA478E0707 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 19:50:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from squire.local (dsl-251-69.dynamic-dsl.frii.net [216.17.251.69]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F408F40D20 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 20:53:48 -0600 (MDT)
Message-ID: <4DA66102.4060200@stpeter.im>
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 20:50:42 -0600
From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110303 Thunderbird/3.1.9
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1
OpenPGP: url=http://www.saint-andre.com/me/stpeter.asc
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha1"; boundary="------------ms080802070405080909030204"
Subject: [apps-discuss] draft IETF 80 minutes
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 02:50:47 -0000
These are draft minutes: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/80/minutes/apparea.txt Corrections are welcome. Many thanks to Bert Greevenbosch for scribing! /psa ======================================================================== AppsArea / APPSAWG Meeting Minutes IETF 80 Monday, March 28, 2010, 0900-1130 Prague, Czech Republic Hilton Prague, Congress Hall II Area Directors: Alexey Melnikov, Peter Saint-Andre, Pete Resnick APPSAWG WG Chairs: Barry Leiba, Jiankang Yao Scribe: Bert Greevenbosch Agenda: <http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/80/agenda/apparea.txt> Slides: <https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/80/materials.html#wg-apparea> Audio: <http://ietf80streaming.dnsalias.net/ietf80/ietf80-ch3-mon-am.mp3> Chat Log: <http://www.ietf.org/jabber/logs/apparea/2011-03-28.txt> ======================================================================== MINUTES Chairs: Note well reviewed Logistics reviewed Agenda bashed Paul Hoffman: Draft-hoffman-server-has-tls-04 Question: Should it be a service discovery protocol? Group is requested to consider. Question: Is there a way to securely negotiate usage of this secure protocol? Remark: We should do this in a separate working group Question: Conflict with W3C security policy? Need to coordinate making sure there are not many different formats. Remark: Requirements in APPAREA is OK, but we need experts. New working group or current DNS based working group? Maybe it can be built on top of DNSsec. Question: Does it require something we already have? Maybe UNAPTR. Don't focus on new protocol, but see if needed, and if so, which technology can be re-used. Show of hands on the following: * Who thinks we should not do it? (small support) * Who thinks we should do it in a separate working group? (medium support) * Who thinks we should do it in apparea? (small support) * Who thinks we don't know enough yet? (highest support) Patrik Faltstrom: Unicode and IDNA Remark: Seems network issue, should be in lower layer. Mark Nottingham: draft-nottingham-http-portal Question: HTTPS could also allow this? More discussion needed. Murray S. Kucherawy: Draft-kucherawy-mta-malformed Several problems could arise when browsers/mail readers give some leeway to malformed messages. There are security issues involved. IETF should consider these and give some guidance. Question: Separate WG or in APPSAWG? Individual draft? Draft-kucherawy-rfc3462bis Question: Connection to SpamRep in OMA? YAM WG is going to recharter. Right place could become YAM. Wait until YAM recharters. If doesn't, then APPSAWG makes sense. Draft-lear-iana-timezone-database More discussion is needed, and a side meeting on Wednesday morning 8:00 – 9:00 is planned. Eliot Lear: draft-lear-iana-timezone-database-02 IANA Procedures for Maintaining the Timezone Database Volunteers are needed to provide feedback on the document. Eric Rescorla: Draft-rescolra-jsms-00 Bar BoF about cryptography 20:00 in Karlin I. Question: Is there a need for a http-URI or is https-URI enough? Bernie Höneisen: IANA Registration of Enumservices for Internet Calendaring Session chair: Look for experts on calendaring (small group) first. Question: Why shut down ENUM and not work on that there? Answer: Leadership wants wg to be shut down. Alexey Melnikov: Draft-melnikov-smtp-altrecip-on-error-00 Remark: Threat analysis is needed. Draft-melnikov-smtp-priority-01 Discussion on mailing list. Florian Echtler: Draft-echtler-gispl-specification-01 Question: Is this related to W3C web-actions? Answer: Yes, it is. Remark: Transmitting the format could be work for another organization. Close relationship to eventing and API. Chris and Mark should look for a suitable WG. Dave Crocker Draft-crocker-doseta-base Remark: Semantics need thorough considerations, as they cannot be changed after implementation. Question: Where is the work to be done? Answer: Not looking for a working group, but for people that are interested. If the interest is there, we can have a look at the mechanics. Chris Lilley http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/20 More discussion needed. Bhumip Khasnabish Virtual Desktop Infrastructure List of possible work items Remark: Proposal in OMA also to set-up virtual experience work item. Next discussions from AD? Work of IETF? Is it a protocol or an API? Need to discuss with ADs. END ========================================================================
- [apps-discuss] draft IETF 80 minutes Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft IETF 80 minutes Barry Leiba
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft IETF 80 minutes Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft IETF 80 minutes Bernie Hoeneisen
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft IETF 80 minutes Cyrus Daboo
- Re: [apps-discuss] draft IETF 80 minutes Peter Saint-Andre