BoFs at IETF-109

Adrian Farrel <> Fri, 30 October 2020 14:04 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 243143A0EC1; Fri, 30 Oct 2020 07:04:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.895
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.895 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Fogust1oyInA; Fri, 30 Oct 2020 07:04:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1C7E73A0EBD; Fri, 30 Oct 2020 07:04:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 09UE4AQe005254; Fri, 30 Oct 2020 14:04:10 GMT
Received: from (unknown []) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AD7B2205B; Fri, 30 Oct 2020 14:04:10 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from (unknown []) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 052F722056; Fri, 30 Oct 2020 14:04:10 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from LAPTOPK7AS653V ( []) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 09UE49l2008638 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 30 Oct 2020 14:04:09 GMT
Reply-To: <>
From: "Adrian Farrel" <>
To: "'The IESG'" <>
Cc: <>
Subject: BoFs at IETF-109
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2020 14:04:08 -0000
Organization: Old Dog Consulting
Message-ID: <088e01d6aec5$895cd0c0$9c167240$>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Thread-Index: Adauwx88y20tIoJ5SDuNkvqpGvw1Ug==
Content-Language: en-gb
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSVA-
X-TM-AS-Result: No--4.475-10.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--4.475-10.0-31-10
X-TMASE-Result: 10--4.474500-10.000000
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: i20fXLuMR8AOwAmmWH5kBKJVTu7sjgg1SmX/0FQED9glbkXtj2kSO3Iw ECVgOanibI16DeMBO+z9rx7tenGpQLwCd9/HKHXXw9GVhGa/57Z+CWCcHScOExlLPW+8b7SapMB UwgqWxUfgTUajEw/mXu6HD+RPT9CAOZnAQBCoE5wvLP1C8DIeOjsY2/UEG7fkJsBO7ID7TfYvkb 4QO7eQRflNKJe54RaK/SFdiV0A5V9w94keflf5fz6rBgno9kSEy4JitPdZ5k2yRg7+bGPTdiJ/I YdEDB2xkWPXQlnII/amF1CBwXjQed+KHNw1Kz57Tauf2PrRb1tTga7Q9sNX6RLf1vz7ecPHPrN5 IsdxmrXKGasRG2kTad1c/jHFQxl07ABo0upccSrCtSG/SQAC8WJt+Dc9d2dF8qTRtZpIdQyjxYy RBa/qJX3mXSdV7KK4WBeLw3ZBYr9TptoDfp6JrMRB0bsfrpPIcSqbxBgG0w77oxiPkcbTVqGRIf jmdfOde1HELLPLPa95P9U4dpvJyWfDrHj3NYkYxKi3eAJLn2csnXg2wR7AMrmZH1GxDObAMIzld /NIJBvEKh5bR1PYFof8kK+K1APpIcrpoIxNunU/lq6oymdYKw==
X-TMASE-SNAP-Result: 1.821001.0001-0-1-12:0,22:0,33:0,34:0-0
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2020 14:04:15 -0000


I'm trying to plan my IETF week and my preparation time. I like to make it
to as many BoFs as I can.

I see from the minutes of the BoF Coordination Call held on 2020-10-09 [1]
that MADINAS and APN were "provisionally approved" for IETF-109, and
indicates a plan for more work to refine the scope of the BoFs. The BoF wiki
[2] shows them both "tentatively approved" and notes them both as "non-WG
forming" meaning, I think, that the intention was to provide a public forum
for investigating the topic and seeing whether there was focus, work to be
done, and support to move the discussion forward.

The front page of the IETF site [4] mentions both BoFs with a pointer to a
blog [5] that says that the "IESG approved two BOFs for scheduling at IETF
109, pending further refinements to the BOF proposals: MADINAS and APN."

As of a few days ago, the IETF-109 agenda [3] showed both MADINAS and APN
scheduled to meet, but checking back today I see that APN has disappeared.
Is that just a snafu?

I checked on the MADINAS and APN mailing list archives and I can't find
anything to explain the status. The last message on the APN list is from the
Secretariat saying a meeting has been scheduled [6], while the MADINAS BoF
description points at the INT area list which also has no recent discussion
about MADINAS after the Secretariat's post saying a meeting has been
scheduled [7].

Could you please clarify the status of these two BoFs.