[SPKM] SPKM BOF Agenda

Jeffrey Hutzelman <jhutz@cmu.edu> Wed, 25 October 2006 21:06 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Gcpwn-0004Uw-7k; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 17:06:01 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Gcpwm-0004Ug-7c for spkm@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 17:06:00 -0400
Received: from chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu ([128.2.185.41]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GcpwX-0003av-7b for spkm@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 17:06:00 -0400
Received: from SIRIUS.FAC.CS.CMU.EDU (SIRIUS.FAC.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.209.170]) (authenticated bits=0) by chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k9PJwOTK022611 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 25 Oct 2006 15:58:25 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 15:58:25 -0400
From: Jeffrey Hutzelman <jhutz@cmu.edu>
To: spkm@ietf.org
Message-ID: <F7513301C01C72901CBF8244@sirius.fac.cs.cmu.edu>
Originator-Info: login-token=Mulberry:01sRsuTBuDo8D9ZqbN5Jleu0iNZXc4T6cekFyx55s=; token_authority=postmaster@andrew.cmu.edu
X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.1.6 (Linux/x86)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 769a46790fb42fbb0b0cc700c82f7081
Cc: Jeffrey Hutzelman <jhutz@cmu.edu>
Subject: [SPKM] SPKM BOF Agenda
X-BeenThere: spkm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Low Infrastructure Public Key GSS mechanism <spkm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spkm>, <mailto:spkm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/spkm>
List-Post: <mailto:spkm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spkm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spkm>, <mailto:spkm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: spkm-bounces@ietf.org

Greetings...

Sam has asked me to chair the SPKM BOF at IETF 67.  The main purpose of a 
BOF is normally to determine whether there is sufficient interest within 
the IETF to form a working group to address a particular problem, and to 
come to some agreement on the scope and goals of that work.  Not all BOF's 
result in the formation of working groups -- sometimes there is not 
sufficient interest or there is no consensus on how to proceed -- but even 
in these cases, the BOF serves its purpose.

In order to achieve that purpose, the majority of time in a BOF is spent on 
presentations of the problem to be solved, followed by any existing work or 
proposed approaches, followed by discussion of how to proceed.  Sometimes 
these discussions are highly contentions; other times they are quite 
straightforward.  However, in general they are focused not on the design 
details, but on higher-level issues such as

- whether the proposed work is appropriate for the IETF
- whether it is a useful application of the IETF's resources
- whether there is interest in pursuing the work
- whether the work should focus on a specific solution, or select from
  among multiple alternatives, or work on more than one approach
- in what ways the work should be constrained

We need to focus first on that discussion, because that is what will be 
needed for the AD's and the IESG to decide whether there is sufficient 
support to form a working group.  However, this will be a fairly long 
meeting slot, so it is possible there will be time left at the end which 
can be used for more detailed technical discussion.

I've posted a preliminary agenda on the IETF web site, at
<http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/06nov/agenda/spkm.txt>

Comments are welcome, of course.

I expect most of the interest will be focused on Andy's draft.  However, in 
the interest of producing the best possible result, there is time in the 
agenda to hear other proposals.  Anyone wanting to make such a proposal 
should be prepared to give a presentation during the BOF; please contact me 
by November 1 so I can put you on the agenda.

Note that the time for alternate proposals is now, not later -- if there do 
not appear to be any serious proposals at the time of the BOF, it is 
unlikely that the charter of any resulting WG would include investigating 
alternate approaches.


-- Jeff

_______________________________________________
SPKM mailing list
SPKM@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spkm