IESG agenda for 2006-04-13 telechat.
fenner@research.att.com (Bill Fenner) Mon, 10 April 2006 11:00 UTC
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FSu7w-0001qY-9O; Mon, 10 Apr 2006 07:00:12 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FSu7u-0001oe-MD for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Mon, 10 Apr 2006 07:00:10 -0400
Received: from mail-red.research.att.com ([192.20.225.110]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FSu7u-0003HF-DI for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Mon, 10 Apr 2006 07:00:10 -0400
Received: from frogbits.attlabs.att.com (frogbits.attlabs.att.com [135.197.129.116]) by mail-blue.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C48C9147D3F for <rtg-dir@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Apr 2006 07:00:09 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from frogbits.attlabs.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by frogbits.attlabs.att.com (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k3AB08bB055963 for <rtg-dir@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Apr 2006 04:00:08 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from fenner@frogbits.attlabs.att.com)
Received: (from fenner@localhost) by frogbits.attlabs.att.com (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id k3AB08rv055962 for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Mon, 10 Apr 2006 04:00:08 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from fenner)
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 04:00:08 -0700
Message-Id: <200604101100.k3AB08rv055962@frogbits.attlabs.att.com>
From: fenner@research.att.com
To: rtg-dir@ietf.org
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: e472ca43d56132790a46d9eefd95f0a5
Subject: IESG agenda for 2006-04-13 telechat.
X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Area Directorate <rtg-dir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-dir>, <mailto:rtg-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:rtg-dir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtg-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-dir>, <mailto:rtg-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org
IESG Agenda Good approximation of what will be included in the Agenda of next Telechat (2006-04-13). Updated 2:2:19 EDT, April 10, 2006 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Administrivia 1.1 Roll Call 1.2 Bash the Agenda 1.3 Approval of the Minutes of the past telechat 1.4 List of Remaining Action Items from Last Telechat 1.5 Review of Projects 2. Protocol Actions Reviews should focus on these questions: "Is this document a reasonable basis on which to build the salient part of the Internet infrastructure? If not, what changes would make it so?" 2.1 WG Submissions 2.1.1 New Item Area Date RTG OSPF Version 2 Management Information Base (Proposed Standard) - 1 of 3 draft-ietf-ospf-mib-update-09.txt [Open Web Ballot] Note: A revision -10 is expected shortly to update some minor issues (the most major is the use of Integer32 vs. Unsigned32 noted in the I-D Tracker's comment log) Token: Bill Fenner RTP Payload Format for the 1998 Version of RAI ITU-T Rec. H.263 Video (H.263+) (Proposed Standard) - 2 of 3 draft-ietf-avt-rfc2429-bis-08.txt [Open Web Ballot] Note: PROTO shepherd Colin Perkins csp@csperkins.org Token: Cullen Jennings Update to DirectoryString Processing in the SEC Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure Certificate and Certificate Revocation List (CRL) Profile (Proposed Standard) - 3 of 3 draft-ietf-pkix-cert-utf8-02.txt Token: Sam Hartman 2.1.2 Returning Item Area Date INT BGP-MPLS IP VPN extension for IPv6 VPN (Proposed Standard) - 1 of 2 draft-ietf-l3vpn-bgp-ipv6-07.txt [Open Web Ballot] Token: Mark Townsley INT Constrained VPN Route Distribution (Proposed Standard) - 2 of 2 draft-ietf-l3vpn-rt-constrain-02.txt [Open Web Ballot] Note: Remaining discuss before the new IESG was inaugerated was held by Alex for implementation reports (which have since been submitted). Ross, as Alex's successor, has entered a "Yes" position. Token: Mark Townsley 2.2 Individual Submissions 2.2.1 New Item NONE 2.2.2 Returning Item NONE 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 NONE 3.1.2 Returning Item NONE 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 Individual 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. Other matters may be recorded in comments to be passed on to the RFC Editor as community review of the document. 3.3.1 New Item NONE 3.3.2 Returning Item Area Date Registration and Administration Guideline INT for Chinese Domain Names (Informational) - 1 of 1 draft-xdlee-idn-cdnadmin-06.txt Note: RFC Editor submission for RFC 3932 processing Token: Mark Townsley 4. Working Group Actions 4.1 WG Creation 4.1.1 Proposed for IETF Review NONE 4.1.2 Proposed for Approval Area Date RTG Jan Secure Inter-Domain Routing (sidr) 30 - 1 of 1 4.2 WG Rechartering 4.2.1 Under evaluation for IETF Review NONE 4.2.2 Proposed for Approval NONE 5. IAB News We Can Use 6. Management Issues 7. Working Group News
- IESG agenda for 2006-04-13 telechat. Bill Fenner