[MIB-DOCTORS] FW: PRELIMINARY Agenda and Package for February 12, 2009 Telechat

"Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com> Fri, 06 February 2009 09:52 UTC

Return-Path: <dromasca@avaya.com>
X-Original-To: mib-doctors@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mib-doctors@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A60C3A6BAC; Fri, 6 Feb 2009 01:52:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.088, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2VjQoR20rGXL; Fri, 6 Feb 2009 01:52:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nj300815-nj-outbound.avaya.com (nj300815-nj-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.12.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 912823A6BAB; Fri, 6 Feb 2009 01:52:12 -0800 (PST)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.37,390,1231131600"; d="scan'208";a="151353517"
Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by nj300815-nj-outbound.avaya.com with ESMTP; 06 Feb 2009 04:51:57 -0500
Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.14]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 06 Feb 2009 04:51:56 -0500
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 10:51:33 +0100
Message-ID: <EDC652A26FB23C4EB6384A4584434A0401395141@307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: PRELIMINARY Agenda and Package for February 12, 2009 Telechat
Thread-Index: AcmH7cPB4IsyK/alQkWtMTXAzASRIAAUmhVg
From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com>
To: aaa-doctors@ietf.org, dns-dir@ietf.org, ops-dir@ietf.org, "MIB Doctors (E-mail)" <mib-doctors@ietf.org>
Subject: [MIB-DOCTORS] FW: PRELIMINARY Agenda and Package for February 12, 2009 Telechat
X-BeenThere: mib-doctors@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: MIB Doctors list <mib-doctors.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mib-doctors>, <mailto:mib-doctors-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mib-doctors>
List-Post: <mailto:mib-doctors@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mib-doctors-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mib-doctors>, <mailto:mib-doctors-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 09:52:20 -0000

Please find below the preliminary agenda of the 2/12 IESG telechat.
Please review the relevant documents and send me your comments and
concerns until 2/11 COB the latest. 

Thanks and Regards,

Dan


2.1 WG Submissions
2.1.1 New Item
  o draft-ietf-idr-flow-spec-05.txt
    Dissemination of flow specification rules (Proposed Standard) - 1 of
2
 
    Token: David Ward
  o draft-ietf-ippm-duplicate-07.txt
    A One-Way Packet Duplication Metric (Proposed Standard) - 2 of 2 
    Token: Lars Eggert

2.1.2 Returning Item
  o draft-ietf-forces-protocol-21.txt
    ForCES Protocol Specification (Proposed Standard) - 1 of 2 
    Token: Ross Callon
  o draft-ietf-pim-rpf-vector-08.txt
    The RPF Vector TLV (Proposed Standard) - 2 of 2 
    Token: David Ward


2.2 Individual Submissions
2.2.1 New Item
  o draft-arkko-arp-iana-rules-05.txt
    IANA Allocation Guidelines for the Address Resolution Protocol (ARP)

    (Proposed Standard) - 1 of 1 
    Token: Russ Housley

2.2.2 Returning Item
NONE
2.2.3 For Action
  o draft-atlas-icmp-unnumbered-06.txt
    Extending ICMP for Interface and Next-hop Identification (Proposed 
    Standard) - 1 of 1 
    Note: Needs to go back to the WG due to the IPR declaration 
    Token: Jari Arkko

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
  o draft-ietf-eai-downgrade-11.txt
    Downgrading mechanism for Email Address Internationalization
(Experimental) 
    - 1 of 3 
    Note: Harald Alvestrand is document shepherd 
    Token: Chris Newman
  o draft-ietf-ccamp-pc-and-sc-reqs-06.txt
    Requirements for the Conversion Between Permanent Connections and
Switched 
    Connections in a Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS)
Network 
    (Informational) - 2 of 3 
    Token: Ross Callon
  o draft-ietf-ccamp-gr-description-04.txt
    Description of the RSVP-TE Graceful Restart Procedures
(Informational)
- 3 
    of 3 
    Token: Ross Callon

3.1.2 Returning Item
  o draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-mcast-reqts-07.txt
    Requirements for Multicast Support in Virtual Private LAN Services 
    (Informational) - 1 of 1 
    Note: Bringing back to telechat to get attention on remaining
discusses. 
    Token: Mark Townsley


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
  o draft-irtf-routing-history-09.txt
    Analysis of Inter-Domain Routing Requirements and History (Historic)
-
1 of 
    2 
    Token: Ross Callon
  o draft-irtf-routing-reqs-10.txt
    A Set of Possible Requirements for a Future Routing Architecture
(Historic) 
    - 2 of 2 
    Token: Ross Callon