Re: [EAI] Fwd: 82nd IETF - WG/BoF Agendas

[John C Klensin <[e-mail]>]

--On Wednesday, November 02, 2011 00:33 -0400 Joseph Yee
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> Draft agenda to post Wednesday.  Given RFC5336bis, RFC5335bis,
> RFC5337bis are in IESG evaluation, we should start focus more
> to the remaining core docs.  Please let John and I know if you
> want some of the session time for presentation.

Specifically, while circumstances could force us to make
last-minute changes, my assumption is that 5336bis and
5335biswill be done and signed off before IETF 82 starts.
5337bis has already been signed off and forwarded to the RFC
Editor; we are not going to talk about it unless someone
discovers a showstopper.  I think we should allocate a brief
slot for any discussion of 4952bis (framework), since the second
Last Call ends on 14 November, but don't expect to spend any
time on it unless problems turn up (see below).

So I hope the meeting can focus on three main topics: 

	-- the three documents that make up the POP/IMAP group
	(i.e., including popimap-downgrade).   The authors and
	co-chairs believe that, modulo an editing pass and some
	issues that are identified in the document, those drafts
	are just about ready to go to the IESG.  My hope is that
	we can tentatively resolve any outstanding issues during
	the meeting, produce (largely editorial) revisions right
	after the meeting, and then go into the Last Call
	process with the goal of having them finished before the
	end of the calendar year.  

	-- developing a plan about what to do with the
	"mailinglist" document.  We either need to complete one
	or be prepared to explain to the IESG and the community
	why it is not necessary.  I think we'd welcome a
	volunteer to do a careful review on RFC 5983 and lead a
	discussion about what changes and updates are required
	and how we might get that done.
	
	-- a discussion about what we intend to do with the
	various "advice" documents.  I am personally a little
	more comfortable moving them forward as Proposed
	Standard Applicability Statements than I would have been
	trying to publish ideas for which we have little
	operational experience as BCPs, but that should be part
	of the conversation, along with whether we have enough
	consensus on the subject matter to move forward and
	whether we can make a plan for the documents that won't
	take the WG another several years.

Anyone who intends to discuss the Applicability Statement versus
BCP topic to carefully read Sections 3.1, 3.2, and 5 of RFC 2026
before arriving at our meeting.   

Reading the latest drafts of draft-ietf-eai-5721bis (POP),
draft-ietf-eai-5738bis (IMAP), and
draft-ietf-eai-popimap-downgrade is going to be mandatory for
having a useful conversation.   Please come prepared.

Finally, as another pre-meeting task, I'd encourage everyone to
look through 4952bis, possibly in conjunction with the notes on
reopening it circulated last week, and submit Last Call comments
as you find appropriate.

I hope to see many of you in Taipei and to hear, on-list and
before the meeting, from anyone who is not coming but who has
opinions on any of those topics.

best, 
   john