[IESG-AGENDA-DIST] IESG Telechat Agenda (HTML) for September 25, 2008

IESG Secretary <iesg-secretary-reply@ietf.org> Thu, 18 September 2008 22:40 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 337953A695A; Thu, 18 Sep 2008 15:40:38 -0700 (PDT)
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 3A4BD3A695A; Thu, 18 Sep 2008 15:40:36 -0700 (PDT)
From: IESG Secretary <iesg-secretary-reply@ietf.org>
To: iesg-agenda-dist@ietf.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <20080918224037.3A4BD3A695A@core3.amsl.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 15:40:37 -0700
Subject: [IESG-AGENDA-DIST] IESG Telechat Agenda (HTML) for September 25, 2008
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="===============0191177879=="
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 (2008-09-25).


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
RTGForCES Forwarding Element Model (Proposed Standard) - 1 of 7
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-forces-model-15.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-forces-model-15.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=2775&filename=draft-ietf-forces-model" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Token: Ross Callon
OPSCAPWAP Protocol Specification (Proposed Standard) - 2 of 7
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-capwap-protocol-specification-12.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-capwap-protocol-specification-12.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=2777&filename=draft-ietf-capwap-protocol-specification" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Token: Dan Romascanu
OPSCAPWAP Access Controller DHCP Option (Proposed Standard) - 3 of 7
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-capwap-dhc-ac-option-01.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-capwap-dhc-ac-option-01.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=2780&filename=draft-ietf-capwap-dhc-ac-option" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Token: Dan Romascanu
RTGISIS Extensions in Support of Inter-AS Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) and Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Traffic Engineering (Proposed Standard) - 4 of 7
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-isis-interas-te-extension-04.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-ccamp-isis-interas-te-extension-04.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=2791&filename=draft-ietf-ccamp-isis-interas-te-extension" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Token: Ross Callon
TSVRPCSEC_GSS Version 2 (Proposed Standard) - 5 of 7
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-nfsv4-rpcsec-gss-v2-05.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-nfsv4-rpcsec-gss-v2-05.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=2808&filename=draft-ietf-nfsv4-rpcsec-gss-v2" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Note: Document Shepherd: Spencer Shepler (spencer.shepler@gmail.com)
Token: Lars Eggert
INTMobility Services Framework Design (MSFD) (Proposed Standard) - 6 of 7
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mipshop-mstp-solution-06.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-mipshop-mstp-solution-06.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=2815&filename=draft-ietf-mipshop-mstp-solution" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Token: Jari Arkko
OPSCAPWAP Protocol Binding for IEEE 802.11 (Proposed Standard) - 7 of 7
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-capwap-protocol-binding-ieee80211-08.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-capwap-protocol-binding-ieee80211-08.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=2824&filename=draft-ietf-capwap-protocol-binding-ieee80211" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Token: Dan Romascanu
2.1.2 Returning Item
      AreaDate
RTGGeneralized MANET Packet/Message Format (Proposed Standard) - 1 of 2
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-manet-packetbb-15.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-manet-packetbb-15.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=2671&filename=draft-ietf-manet-packetbb" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Token: Ross Callon
RTGRepresenting multi-value time in MANETs (Proposed Standard) - 2 of 2
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-manet-timetlv-07.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-manet-timetlv-07.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=2691&filename=draft-ietf-manet-timetlv" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Token: Ross Callon

2.2 Individual Submissions

          2.2.1 New Item
      AreaDate
GENWebDAV Current Principal Extension (Proposed Standard) - 1 of 1
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-sanchez-webdav-current-principal-01.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-sanchez-webdav-current-principal-01.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=2835&filename=draft-sanchez-webdav-current-principal" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Token: Lisa Dusseault
2.2.2 Returning Item
      AreaDate
APPURI Scheme for GSM Short Message Service (Proposed Standard) - 1 of 1
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-wilde-sms-uri-16.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-wilde-sms-uri-16.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=1623&filename=draft-wilde-sms-uri" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Token: Lisa Dusseault

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
OPSCAPWAP Threat Analysis for IEEE 802.11 Deployments (Informational) - 1 of 1
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-capwap-threat-analysis-04.txt" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-capwap-threat-analysis-04.txt https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=print_ballot&ballot_id=2799&filename=draft-ietf-capwap-threat-analysis" rel="nofollow">[Open Web Ballot]
Token: Dan Romascanu
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
         
AreaDate
RAISep 18Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (alto) - 1 of 1
Token:Lisa
          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
INTSep 4Softwires (softwire) - 1 of 1
Token:Mark

5. IAB News We Can Use

6. Management Issues

6.1 Review of arp-parameters request 2 of 2 [IANA #183428] (Michelle Cotton)
6.2 Large Interim Mtgs (Russ Housley)

7. Working Group News

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