[IESG-AGENDA-DIST] IESG Telechat Agenda (Plain Text) for October 9, 2008

          INTERNET ENGINEERING STEERING GROUP (IESG)
Summarized Agenda for the October 9, 2008 IESG Teleconference

This agenda was generated at 8:8:33 EDT, October 3, 2008
Web version of this agenda can be found at:
http://www.ietf.org/IESG/agenda.html

1. Administrivia

  1.1 Roll Call
  1.2 Bash the Agenda
  1.3 Approval of the Minutes
  1.4 Review of Action Items

2. Protocol Actions
	Reviews should focus on these questions: "Is this document a
	reasonable basis on which to build the salient part of the Internet
	infrastructure? If not, what changes would make it so?"

2.1 WG Submissions
2.1.1 New Item
  o draft-ietf-avt-rtp-toffset-07.txt
    Transmission Time offsets in RTP streams (Proposed Standard) - 1 of 6 
    Note: Tom Taylor is the PROTO Shepherd 
    Token: Cullen Jennings
  o draft-ietf-sipping-race-examples-06.txt
    Example calls flows of race conditions in the Session Initiation Protocol 
    (SIP) (BCP) - 2 of 6 
    Token: Jon Peterson
  o draft-ietf-forces-model-15.txt
    ForCES Forwarding Element Model (Proposed Standard) - 3 of 6 
    Token: Ross Callon
  o draft-ietf-capwap-protocol-specification-13.txt
    CAPWAP Protocol Specification (Proposed Standard) - 4 of 6 
    Token: Dan Romascanu
  o draft-ietf-capwap-protocol-binding-ieee80211-10.txt
    CAPWAP Protocol Binding for IEEE 802.11 (Proposed Standard) - 5 of 6 
    Token: Dan Romascanu
  o draft-ietf-avt-rtp-g711wb-03.txt
    RTP Payload Format for ITU-T Recommendation G.711.1 (Proposed Standard) - 6 
    of 6 
    Note: Roni Even is the document shepherd. 
    Token: Cullen Jennings

2.1.2 Returning Item
NONE

2.2 Individual Submissions
2.2.1 New Item
NONE
2.2.2 Returning Item
NONE

3. Document Actions

3.1 WG Submissions
	Reviews should focus on these questions: "Is this document a reasonable
	contribution to the area of Internet engineering which it covers? If
	not, what changes would make it so?"

3.1.1 New Item
NONE
3.1.2 Returning Item
NONE

3.2 Individual Submissions Via AD
	Reviews should focus on these questions: "Is this document a reasonable
	contribution to the area of Internet engineering which it covers? If
	not, what changes would make it so?"

3.2.1 New Item
  o draft-bryant-mpls-tp-jwt-report-00.txt
    JWT Report on MPLS Architectural Considerations for a Transport Profile 
    (Informational) - 1 of 1 
    Token: David Ward

3.2.2 Returning Item
NONE
3.3 Independent Submissions Via RFC Editor
	The IESG will use RFC 3932 responses: 1) The IESG has not
	found any conflict between this document and IETF work; 2) The
	IESG thinks that this work is related to IETF work done in WG
	<X>, but this does not prevent publishing; 3) The IESG thinks
	that publication is harmful to work in WG <X> and recommends
	not publishing at this time; 4) The IESG thinks that this
	document violates the IETF procedures for <X> and should
	therefore not be published without IETF review and IESG
	approval; 5) The IESG thinks that this document extends an
	IETF protocol in a way that requires IETF review and should
	therefore not be published without IETF review and IESG approval.

	The document shepherd must propose one of these responses in
	the Data Tracker note and supply complete text in the IESG
	Note portion of the write-up. The Area Director ballot positions
	indicate consensus with the response proposed by the
	document shepherd.

	Other matters may be recorded in comments, and the comments will
	be passed on to the RFC Editor as community review of the document.

3.3.1 New Item
  o draft-santoni-timestampeddata-04.txt
    Syntax for binding documents with time stamps (Informational) - 1 of 1 
    Token: Tim Polk

3.3.2 Returning Item
  o draft-munakata-sip-privacy-guideline-04.txt
    Guidelines for Using the Privacy Mechanism for SIP (Informational) - 1 of 2 
    Note: Proposing that this use RFC3932 Note 2:       This RFC is not a 
    candidate for any level of Internet Standard..       The IETF disclaims any 
    knowledge of the fitness of this RFC for.       any purpose and in 
    particular notes that the decision to publish.       is not based on IETF 
    review for such things as security,.       congestion control, or 
    inappropriate interaction with deployed.       protocols.  The RFC Editor 
    has chosen to publish this document at.       its discretion.  Readers of 
    this document should exercise caution.       in evaluating its value for 
    implementation and deployment.  See.       RFC 3932 for more information.. 
    Token: Jon Peterson
  o draft-templin-autoconf-dhcp-16.txt
    MANET Autoconfiguration using Virtual Enterprise Traversal (VET) 
    (Informational) - 2 of 2 
    Token: Ross Callon

3.3.3 For Action
  o draft-bberry-rfc4938bis-00.txt
    PPP Over Ethernet (PPPoE) Extensions for Credit Flow and Link Metrics 
    (Informational) - 1 of 1 
    Token: Russ Housley

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

6. Management Issue

 6.1 Referencing Non-Standardized Technology in IETF Documents (Dave Ward)

 6.2 Expert Review for tel reg (Cullen Jennings)

7. Agenda Working Group News