[mif] New Charter Items?

Margaret Cullen <mrcullen42@gmail.com> Tue, 01 March 2016 12:32 UTC

Return-Path: <mrcullen42@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: mif@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mif@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D74C1B2B37 for <mif@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Mar 2016 04:32:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.75
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vwelAwM06kSJ for <mif@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Mar 2016 04:32:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yk0-x233.google.com (mail-yk0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c07::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0F0C01B2B3B for <mif@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Mar 2016 04:32:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-yk0-x233.google.com with SMTP id z13so76005174ykd.0 for <mif@ietf.org>; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 04:32:10 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:content-transfer-encoding:subject:message-id:date:to :mime-version; bh=xa+Kp96pP7Y6xOVGwCljI5iU4OV+lIi4qNZ+MxSORuc=; b=M49s59MwUePvpW6lyepjKJtrMRBRJyqfaB+Qw6vJiumTGOzhD+1UOhUbPBM18LLPUX cMqUhscT6dJ5T5nmecO1fUqRZ3wM7VGxmQB1MaGbpGHrOH/vXV5B7B/m8Wr9RUEi1ZZh mcZ7/SAdub2+vS9tbel/VM+wFkXmafUt3U1BXtS57cfa+lXIWGozAbIAKQ090ENLeIvX gsNzEPjnF2kqFjOX5fFZodSE7GulMnOLaMa0QCDsGu6mfaMlnyc90A52r8zg0IcqckcL ZVB16q/24tXYd49tkJyrLMzOEV9zy95/wyUdSWyt+9xnq3EVsSyNYJvQZgNEfdPQMgG4 Z6eA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:content-transfer-encoding:subject :message-id:date:to:mime-version; bh=xa+Kp96pP7Y6xOVGwCljI5iU4OV+lIi4qNZ+MxSORuc=; b=jJuIcAPPPZ0JdsT1KeJxJE3Jqw15rEjGgOsA/6hrkO58fg+v45KGBo5Zvko/LPE4YW WtMaStwflo7uR9qwAQi7To9yDhON9visU0s4+0jTvIxLVQOrcl6UgXFQS3LaRcHmBfr9 Qcrl/cBuMwoigunnqhXv4sYX3tz2W2+pOS/SI4ZgfFY6yg+ZT0gGkC0ivMN8FRxDvjZt /IB7SUbUM8O9gDPjAo+/aJ8y51+gxBCB83pIrCzkmyXYjEULWJq8b4T4mFt6oDPx4EIA RLZ/JRia5OxLbWgOGXooj2ghi/LuIjoNZBorI7rG/HR0nZOVegcr8m1sQBunbRHiCoYT lm+g==
X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJICPF/Wh7xkUlQyXGm7LGEskgu6RwDIalHb3PhW3voBkAXCimhq4HMQIK/QjDcrVA==
X-Received: by 10.37.64.207 with SMTP id n198mr12128130yba.12.1456835529387; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 04:32:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from new-host.home (pool-72-74-19-153.bstnma.fios.verizon.net. [72.74.19.153]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u134sm24341536ywf.48.2016.03.01.04.32.08 for <mif@ietf.org> (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 01 Mar 2016 04:32:08 -0800 (PST)
From: Margaret Cullen <mrcullen42@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <C4D2A792-2410-4B19-B599-4501211B730B@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 07:32:07 -0500
To: "mif@ietf.org List" <mif@ietf.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\))
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mif/NBeZmnObGIBo1x1Vot7Q6gttxWM>
Subject: [mif] New Charter Items?
X-BeenThere: mif@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiple Interface Discussion List <mif.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mif>, <mailto:mif-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mif/>
List-Post: <mailto:mif@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mif-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif>, <mailto:mif-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2016 12:32:12 -0000

At the last MIF meeting, and later on the mailing list, we reached consensus that we would use a two-step approach for the configuration of explicit PVDs.  RAs would be used to provide the information to do a second-step look up, including the PVD name.  Then a second step would be used to look up further information about the PVD.

The only proposal we currently have on the table for a second-step look-up is a DNS look-up, and no one seems to be advocating for another method.  So, to define a two-step approach using DNS, there are three things that we need to specify:

- An NTP server option for RAs, so that DNSSEC can be used for the lookup.
- A PVD Name option for RAs, so that we can tell hosts what PVD to look up.
- An explanation of what PVD information will be held in the DNS and how.

Those things would need to be added to our charter, so that we can accept corresponding work items.

Does anyone have any objection to adding explicit PVD configuration to the MIF charter and adding these three work items to our milestone list?  If not, the chairs and the AD will propose a charter/milestone update along these lines.

Thanks,
Margaret