[IESG-AGENDA-DIST] IESG Telechat Agenda (HTML) for January 8, 2009

IESG Secretary <iesg-secretary-reply@ietf.org> Fri, 02 January 2009 17:19 UTC

Return-Path: <iesg-agenda-dist-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: iesg-agenda-dist-archive@optimus.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-iesg-agenda-dist-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 453CF3A6A11; Fri, 2 Jan 2009 09:19:47 -0800 (PST)
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 3A6E23A6937; Fri, 2 Jan 2009 09:19:46 -0800 (PST)
From: IESG Secretary <iesg-secretary-reply@ietf.org>
To: iesg-agenda-dist@ietf.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <20090102171946.3A6E23A6937@core3.amsl.com>
Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2009 09:19:46 -0800
Subject: [IESG-AGENDA-DIST] IESG Telechat Agenda (HTML) for January 8, 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/pipermail/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>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0298885193=="
Sender: iesg-agenda-dist-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: iesg-agenda-dist-bounces@ietf.org

IESG Agenda

IESG Agenda

Good approximation of what will be included in the Agenda of next Telechat (2009-01-08).


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
RTGSimplified Extension of LSP Space for IS-IS (Proposed Standard) - 1 of 3
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-isis-wg-extlsp-05.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-isis-wg-extlsp-05.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=2842&filename=draft-ietf-isis-wg-extlsp" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Token: Ross Callon
RAIA Framework for Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Session Policies (Proposed Standard) - 2 of 3
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-sip-session-policy-framework-05.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-sip-session-policy-framework-05.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=2945&filename=draft-ietf-sip-session-policy-framework" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Token: Cullen Jennings
RTGCapabilities Advertisement with BGP-4 (Proposed Standard) - 3 of 3
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idr-rfc3392bis-03.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-idr-rfc3392bis-03.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=2986&filename=draft-ietf-idr-rfc3392bis" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Token: David Ward
2.1.2 Returning Item
      AreaDate
SECSecure/Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (S/MIME) Version 3.2 Message Specification (Proposed Standard) - 1 of 2
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-smime-3851bis-08.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-smime-3851bis-08.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=2905&filename=draft-ietf-smime-3851bis" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Token: Tim Polk
SECSecure/Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (S/MIME) Version 3.2 Certificate Handling (Proposed Standard) - 2 of 2
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-smime-3850bis-08.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-smime-3850bis-08.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=2906&filename=draft-ietf-smime-3850bis" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Token: Tim Polk

2.2 Individual Submissions

          2.2.1 New Item
      NONE
2.2.2 Returning Item
      AreaDate
GENIESG Procedures for Handling of Independent and IRTF Stream Submissions (BCP) - 1 of 1
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-housley-iesg-rfc3932bis-06.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-housley-iesg-rfc3932bis-06.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=2895&filename=draft-housley-iesg-rfc3932bis" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Note: Diff: http://www.arkko.com/ietf/iesg/rfc3932bisdiff.html
Token: Jari Arkko

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
      AreaDate
SECDES and IDEA Cipher Suites for Transport Layer Security (TLS) (Informational) - 1 of 2
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-tls-des-idea-02.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-tls-des-idea-02.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=2920&filename=draft-ietf-tls-des-idea" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Token: Tim Polk
TSVPacket Delay Variation Applicability Statement (Informational) - 2 of 2
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ippm-delay-var-as-01.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-ippm-delay-var-as-01.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=2992&filename=draft-ietf-ippm-delay-var-as" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Token: Lars Eggert
3.1.2 Returning Item
      AreaDate
RTGThe RPF Vector TLV (Informational) - 1 of 1
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pim-rpf-vector-06.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-pim-rpf-vector-06.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=2930&filename=draft-ietf-pim-rpf-vector" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Token: David Ward

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
RTGPerformance Analysis of Inter-Domain Path Computation Methodologies (Informational) - 1 of 3
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-dasgupta-ccamp-path-comp-analysis-02.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-dasgupta-ccamp-path-comp-analysis-02.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=2858&filename=draft-dasgupta-ccamp-path-comp-analysis" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Token: Ross Callon
INTVoIP Configuration Server Address Option (Informational) - 2 of 3
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-raj-dhc-tftp-addr-option-04.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-raj-dhc-tftp-addr-option-04.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=2955&filename=draft-raj-dhc-tftp-addr-option" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Token: Jari Arkko
INTService Selection for Mobile IPv4 (Informational) - 3 of 3
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-korhonen-mip4-service-07.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-korhonen-mip4-service-07.txt
Token: Jari Arkko
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
                    NONE
          4.1.2 Proposed for Approval
         
AreaDate
APPDec 11Message Organization (morg) - 1 of 1
Token:Chris
         

4.2 WG Rechartering

          4.2.1 Under evaluation for IETF Review
         
AreaDate
OPSDec 17Network Configuration (netconf) - 1 of 2
Token:Dan
TSVDec 19IP Performance Metrics (ippm) - 2 of 2
Token:Lars
          4.2.2 Proposed for Approval
                    NONE

5. IAB News We Can Use

6. Management Issues

6.1 Nomcom appointment to the IAOC (Ross Callon)

7. Working Group News

_______________________________________________
IESG-AGENDA-DIST mailing list
IESG-AGENDA-DIST@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iesg-agenda-dist