[Lager] meeting notes of our informal meeting wed 22nd

"Marc Blanchet" <marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca> Thu, 23 July 2015 06:08 UTC

From: Marc Blanchet <marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca>
To: lager@ietf.org
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 08:08:12 +0200
Message-ID: <DF268FA2-6154-4169-B08A-D2C775333EC7@viagenie.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_MailMate_C9D4B4FD-0344-4E08-BDEC-860B0DAC2F7E_="
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lager/Ehe2jqnQuaEzfS7gXfrTGUCA-Q8>
Subject: [Lager] meeting notes of our informal meeting wed 22nd
Precedence: list

Hello,
  On wed July 22nd, 20h00 in Istanbul room of the Prague Hilton. About 
16 people show up in this informal meeting on lager, including one 
remote by skype.   Thank to Scott Hollenbeck to organize this and to 
Verisign to host with beer (lager obviously!) and food.

Marc.

=======
Here is my own notes of the discussion.

- Use the wg issue tracker for wg todos
- TODO for draft authors: list current known issues of the draft in the
- should we split the draft in multiple ones, separating context vs 
syntax for example
- co-chairs should discuss the process for the wg to adopt the draft
- the draft is currently difficult to read for non implementors. Should 
we refactor it?
- there are currently at least 4 known implementations of the draft.
- the ICANN LGR Integration Panel is using test files that could be 
available publicly
- need fresh eyes to review the draft
- could some recursive/loop happen while parsing or using (i.e. testing 
a label) an (or a set of) XML files? maybe, maybe not but consensus is 
that we ought to add a paragraph or two about it to make the implementor 
aware of this possibility.
- while the primary use case is for root zone labels, there are also 
other levels in the DNS naming tree that it might be used. Moreover, it 
could be used elsewhere. So the spec should be generic as possible, 
while not trying to incorporate too much non relevant stuff.
- should we have a guidelines+terminology document related to the use of 
the spec?
- should we have a IANA registry for LGRs (and replace/update the 
current IDN practices registry)? Maybe, but this is outside of IETF 
scope. IANA is planning to supersede the registry with an lager 
compliant entries registry, and with some transition mechanism tbd.
- should the integration algorithm used for CJK multiple LGR integration 
be documented for other use cases?
- should we have an interaction with EPPext, given eppext discussion on 
idntables?
- co-chairs are considering virtual (aka webex) interim meetings between 
now and yokohama ietf. co-chairs will send a doodle to schedule the 
meetings. Target weeks are:
  + august 24th
  + sept 21th
  + oct 12th

[Lager] meeting notes of our informal meeting wed… Marc Blanchet