[IESG-AGENDA-DIST] IESG Telechat Agenda (HTML) for February 21, 2008

[IESG Secretary <[e-mail]>]

IESG Agenda

IESG Agenda

Good approximation of what will be included in the Agenda of next Telechat (2008-02-07)

---

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       Area Date INT MIP6-bootstrapping for the Integrated Scenario (Proposed Standard) - 1 of 6 http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mip6-bootstrapping-integrated-dhc-05.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-mip6-bootstrapping-integrated-dhc-05.txt Note: Document waiting on mip6-hiopt resolutions before it can complete succesful WGLC in DHG WG   Token: Jari Arkko INT   Nogotiation for IPv6 datagram compression using IPv6 Control Protocol (Proposed Standard) - 2 of 6   http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipv6-compression-nego-v2-01.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-ipv6-compression-nego-v2-01.txt Note: Document Shepherd is Brian Haberman Token: Jari Arkko     INT   DHCP Option for Home Information Discovery in MIPv6 (Proposed Standard) - 3 of 6   http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mip6-hiopt-10.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-mip6-hiopt-10.txt Note: Document Shepherd is Basavaraj Patil Token: Jari Arkko     INT   Network Mobility (NEMO) Extensions for Mobile IPv4 (Proposed Standard) - 4 of 6   http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mip4-nemo-v4-base-08.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-mip4-nemo-v4-base-08.txt Note: Document Shepherd is Pete McCann Token: Jari Arkko     INT   Extensions Formats for Unidirectional Lightweight Encapsulation (ULE) and the Generic Stream Encapsulation (GSE) (Proposed Standard) - 5 of 6   http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipdvb-ule-ext-07.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-ipdvb-ule-ext-07.txt Token: Mark Townsley     SEC   EAP Extensions for EAP Re-authentication Protocol (ERP) (Proposed Standard) - 6 of 6   http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-hokey-erx-08.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-hokey-erx-08.txt Token: Tim Polk 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       Area Date SEC Handover Key Management and Re-authentication Problem Statement (Informational) - 1 of 3 http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-hokey-reauth-ps-07.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-hokey-reauth-ps-07.txt Token: Tim Polk     OPS   Problem Statement of Default Address Selection in Multi-prefix Environment: Operational Issues of RFC3484 Default Rules (Informational) - 2 of 3   http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-v6ops-addr-select-ps-03.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-v6ops-addr-select-ps-03.txt Token: Ron Bonica     OPS   Requirements for address selection mechanisms (Informational) - 3 of 3   http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-v6ops-addr-select-req-04.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-v6ops-addr-select-req-04.txt Token: Ron Bonica 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       NONE 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           Area Date RTG Dec20 Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks (roll) - 1 of 1 Token: David

	4.2 WG Rechartering           4.2.1 Under evaluation for IETF Review                     NONE           4.2.2 Proposed for Approval           Area Date SEC Jan21 Public-Key Infrastructure (X.509) (pkix) - 1 of 1 Token: Tim

5. IAB News We Can Use

6. Management Issues

6.1 RFC Errata (Russ Housley)
6.2 Clarification of registration procedures for RFC 3688 (Michelle Cotton)
6.3 Should RFC 1701 be updated/obsoleted by RFC 2784? (Russ Housley)
6.4 URN allocation following RFC 3688 in an IRTF document (Dan Romascanu)

7. Working Group News

_______________________________________________
IESG-AGENDA-DIST mailing list
[e-mail]
http://www.iesg.org/mailman/listinfo/iesg-agenda-dist