[IESG-AGENDA-DIST] IESG Telechat Agenda (HTML) for March 12, 2009

IESG Secretary <iesg-secretary-reply@ietf.org> Fri, 06 March 2009 00:04 UTC

Return-Path: <wwwrun@core3.amsl.com>
X-Original-To: iesg-agenda-dist@ietf.org
Delivered-To: iesg-agenda-dist@core3.amsl.com
Received: by core3.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 30) id 92C6E28C1F6; Thu, 5 Mar 2009 16:04:27 -0800 (PST)
From: IESG Secretary <iesg-secretary-reply@ietf.org>
To: iesg-agenda-dist@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <20090306000427.92C6E28C1F6@core3.amsl.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 16:04:27 -0800
Subject: [IESG-AGENDA-DIST] IESG Telechat Agenda (HTML) for March 12, 2009
X-BeenThere: iesg-agenda-dist@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Distribution of IESG agendas <iesg-agenda-dist.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iesg-agenda-dist>, <mailto:iesg-agenda-dist-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/iesg-agenda-dist>
List-Post: <mailto:iesg-agenda-dist@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:iesg-agenda-dist-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iesg-agenda-dist>, <mailto:iesg-agenda-dist-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 00:04:27 -0000

IESG Agenda

IESG Agenda

Good approximation of what will be included in the Agenda of next Telechat (2009-03-12).


1. Administrivia

    1.1 Roll Call
    1.2 Bash the Agenda
    1.3 Approval of the Minutes of the past telechat
    1.4 List of Remaining Action Items from Last Telechat

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
      AreaDate
TSVTraversal Using Relays around NAT (TURN): Relay Extensions to Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN) (Proposed Standard) - 1 of 9
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-behave-turn-13.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-behave-turn-13.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=2322&filename=draft-ietf-behave-turn" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Token: Magnus Westerlund
RAIRTP payload format for mU-law EMbedded Codec for Low-delay IP communication (UEMCLIP) speech codec (Proposed Standard) - 2 of 9
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-avt-rtp-uemclip-04.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-avt-rtp-uemclip-04.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=2827&filename=draft-ietf-avt-rtp-uemclip" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Note: The document shepherd is Roni Even.
Token: Cullen Jennings
SECIPsec Channels: Connection Latching (Proposed Standard) - 3 of 9
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-btns-connection-latching-08.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-btns-connection-latching-08.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=2836&filename=draft-ietf-btns-connection-latching" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Token: Tim Polk
INTSoftwire Security Analysis and Requirements (Proposed Standard) - 4 of 9
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-softwire-security-requirements-06.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-softwire-security-requirements-06.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=2935&filename=draft-ietf-softwire-security-requirements" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Token: Mark Townsley
OPSNETCONF Over Transport Layer Security (TLS) (Proposed Standard) - 5 of 9
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-netconf-tls-07.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-netconf-tls-07.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=2950&filename=draft-ietf-netconf-tls" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Note: Mehmet Ersue is the PROTO-shepherd
Token: Dan Romascanu
INTNetwork Time Protocol Version 4 Protocol And Algorithms Specification (Proposed Standard) - 6 of 9
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ntp-ntpv4-proto-11.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-ntp-ntpv4-proto-11.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=2973&filename=draft-ietf-ntp-ntpv4-proto" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Token: Mark Townsley
INTDefinitions of Managed Objects for Network Time Protocol Version 4 (NTPv4) (Proposed Standard) - 7 of 9
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ntp-ntpv4-mib-05.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-ntp-ntpv4-mib-05.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=2974&filename=draft-ietf-ntp-ntpv4-mib" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Token: Mark Townsley
APPThe Lemonade Profile (Proposed Standard) - 8 of 9
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-lemonade-profile-bis-12.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-lemonade-profile-bis-12.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=3014&filename=draft-ietf-lemonade-profile-bis" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Note: Glenn Parsons is the Document Shepherd
Token: Chris Newman
INTHeartbeat Mechanism for Proxy Mobile IPv6 (Proposed Standard) - 9 of 9
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-netlmm-pmipv6-heartbeat-05.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-netlmm-pmipv6-heartbeat-05.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=3024&filename=draft-ietf-netlmm-pmipv6-heartbeat" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Token: Jari Arkko
2.1.2 Returning Item
      AreaDate
APPNetnews Architecture and Protocols (Proposed Standard) - 1 of 1
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-usefor-usepro-14.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-usefor-usepro-14.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=2875&filename=draft-ietf-usefor-usepro" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Token: Lisa Dusseault

2.2 Individual Submissions

          2.2.1 New Item
      AreaDate
GENReduced Backus-Naur Form (RBNF) A Syntax Used in Various Protocol Specifications (Proposed Standard) - 1 of 2
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-farrel-rtg-common-bnf-08.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-farrel-rtg-common-bnf-08.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=2999&filename=draft-farrel-rtg-common-bnf" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Token: Ross Callon
APPIMAP Response Codes (Proposed Standard) - 2 of 2
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-gulbrandsen-imap-response-codes-07.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-gulbrandsen-imap-response-codes-07.txt
Note: Alexey Melnikov is document shepherd
Token: Chris Newman
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
      AreaDate
GENDiameter Command Code Registration for Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) Evolved Packet System (EPS) (Informational) - 1 of 1
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-jones-dime-3gpp-eps-command-codes-01.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-jones-dime-3gpp-eps-command-codes-01.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=2995&filename=draft-jones-dime-3gpp-eps-command-codes" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Note: IETF LC ends on 3/5. A new revised I-D will be available immediatly after the Last Call.
Token: Dan Romascanu
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
      NONE
3.3.2 Returning Item
      NONE

4. Working Group Actions

         

4.1 WG Creation

          4.1.1 Proposed for IETF Review
         
AreaDate
INTMar 5Locator/ID Separation Protocol (lisp) - 1 of 3
Token:Jari
RAIFeb 27Session Initiation Protocol Core (sipcore) - 2 of 3
Token:Cullen
RAIFeb 27Dispatch (dispatch) - 3 of 3
Token:Cullen
          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
         
AreaDate
INTFeb 18Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration (autoconf) - 1 of 2
Token:Jari
RTGFeb 20Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks (roll) - 2 of 2
Token:David

5. IAB News We Can Use

6. Management Issues

7. Working Group News