 |
 |
 |
Minutes of the 12 August Teleconference were approved.
IESG
Rob Austein:, Bert Wijnen:
ongoing discussion on IETF reorganisation, with careful progress
working on Todd Glassey and Tony Hain appeals
considering draft-rfc-editor-rfc2223bis-07.txt for publication as an Informational RFC. The IAB is requested to send comments, if any, as soon as possible.
The IAB considered this document and expressed a strong preference for a BCP document that describes the policies of the RFC Editor role, while agreeing with the concept of using an Informational document to describe instructions to authors. It was observed that the current draft contains both instructions to RFC authors and descriptions of elements of RFC Editor policy.
online-ballot system currently scheduled to go live with telechat of Sept 18th
baker-liaisons doc was discussed, no IESG outcome as yet. Suggestions were that liaison person should be responsible for the follow up and make sure proper process was followed. Not clear that current liaison people are aware of that task and/or that they would be willing to take that responsibility. Does IAB have a view on that?
The IAB considered this as part of agenda item 9
RFC Editor
Joyce Reynolds:
The RFC Editor held a teleconference with Harald, Leslie and Lynn on the 5th September.
HTML wdiff files are being routinely provided to authors
Hired a new GRA (Graduate Research Assistant) for programming support, to replace the student who graduated in May, and has been employed by Microsoft.
We are ready to publicly announce our XML version of the rfc-index
JKRey is on jury duty in U.S. Federal District Court
the month of September/early October.
Tasks in progress
Awaiting Harald's input on RFC 2223bis, which we are anxious to publish.
Experimenting with editing XML.
Considering suggestion from John Klensin to add a new timeout state to processing of individual submissions.
It was noted that the RFC Editor has established an "RFC Editorial Board". The IAB was informed that this was a technical review body intended to offer advice to the RFC Editor on individual submissions to the RFC Editor, acting as an additional source of input to the RFC Editor in reviewing individual submissions. It was noted that this "RFC Editorial Board" review was intended to occur prior to IESG review. The IAB expressed their support of the concept, but indicated that advance circulation of documentation of such changes to the RFC Editor process should be part of the overall process.
IRTF
Vern Paxson:
Discussions with the IETF's legal counsel have begun regarding formulating an IRTF IPR policy. A basic issue to resolve is procedurally how to draft and refine the policy.
ASRG has added a co-chair, Yakov Shafranovich.
IRTF research group chairs are now required to send brief monthly activity summaries to the IRSG. The intent is to periodically condense these and make them available via the IRTF web pages.
ISOC
Lynn St Amour:
IAB Advisory Committee
Leslie Daigle:
ITU-T
Scott Bradner:
W3C
Leslie Daigle:
ICANN - TLG
Geoff Huston:, Mike St Johns
ICANN - Liaison to the Board
John Klensin:
The new Board has held one substantive teleconference, mostly concerning a request from the .NAME registry to start registering personal names at the second level, in addition to their original plan to register family names at the second level but to register/delegate only third-level names to individuals. .NAME was given permission to do that. I did raise a flag about the scaling properties of domains that tried to register every person in the world at the second level, but the Board's conclusion seemed to be that the current domain takeup rate was at a scale such that this presented no additional scaling concerns.
It is noted that the March 2004 ICANN meeting conflicts with the IETF meeting.
The process of selecting the "IANA General Manager" is proceeding. Undertakings were provided that the IETF chair, the IAB chair and the IETF liaison to the ICANN Board would be consulted during this process, although there is no direct evidence that this has taken place as yet.
My appointment expires with the ICANN Annual Meeting. It is not clear yet when that meeting will be -- there is an effort to tie it to the Carthage meeting the last week in October, but, given other constraints, that may or may not be successful. If it is not, there may be a further meeting something late in the year, probably mid-December. But the IAB should start thinking about its options regarding this liaison position.
RSSAC
Rob Austein:
The IRTF chair reported on some uncertainty as to how to proceed with an IPR policy for the IRTF. There has been a proposal to adapt the IETF IPR policy for the IRTF, but it is unclear whether there might be legal issue or further obligations given the nature of the IRTF in terms of membership and consensus, and its relationship to the IAB.
The IAB accepted a proposal from the IRTF chair to develop an IRTF IPR policy via the RFC BCP process, using as a base a revision of RFC 2014, and incorporation of relevant outcomes from the IPR WG. The draft of this document would be open to community review in the normal course of document drafting and review. In this mode, the IRSG and IAB would be consulted, but the document would also reflect a more general IETF community consensus, with corresponding visibility.
Sally Floyd reported on some investigation she has been undertaking on the general topic of anti-spam measures, and the view was expressed that there may be value in further IETF activities beyond the current IRTF ASRG. It was noted that the ASRG has a document that looks at technical considerations, and one of the outcomes in the RG is looking at Internet Standards for anti-spam efforts. One possibility is to ask the ASRG in a more focused way to report on actions that are ready to pass to the IETF. Another question that the IAB could ask is if there are other documents to need to be done here. Options for further consideration include a Workshop, an expanded framework of effort that includes IETF-based WG activity in conjunction with RG activity, additional investigatory efforts on the topic
A telechat will be convened to discuss this topic in further detail.
The IAB notes the proposal from John Klensin regarding the RFC Editor's process for handling revisions of individual submissions to the RFC Editor.
The IAB decided to await the RFC Editor's response to the proposals before making any comment on this topic.
The IAB noted a planned ITU-T workshop concerning the administrative and operational arrangements for the .int TLD. It was noted that the current IANA records clearly places this domain within IANA in terms of its administration and technical operation, with an intended purpose of use by various international bodies such as treaty organizations. The IAB noted that the IAB had no intention to place any infrastructure databases referenced in IETF standards into this domain, and that the ".arpa" domain was being used for this purpose within Internet Standard protocols.
The IAB reviewed the current liaison procedures regarding liaison with the IETF. In conjunction with the current effort in drafting a document concerning the handling of liaison communications, it was felt that there was a need to document the process for entering into a liaison arrangement with an external body, and also documenting the process for appointing individuals into liaison roles and their associated liaison responsibilities. It was considered that such a document be produced as an IAB document.
The IAB considered a liaison proposal from the Open Mobile Alliance. The IAB Executive Director will review the proposal.
The IAB considered a request for a meeting liaison for an ITU meeting with the GSMP WG. It was noted that the activity level in the IETF is relatively low at this stage, and this should be communicated to the meeting as part of the liaison communication.
Liaison arrangements with the IEEE were discussed and additional information will be circulated to the IAB on current liaison activities.
Due to time constraints, consideration of this item was deferred to the IAB mailing list.
The IAB will select a Nomcom liaison from the 6 IAB members whose term is not expiring in March 2004. The selection was not completed at the meeting.
The scheduling of IAB calls currently covers 6 timezones, from UTC+10/+11 to UTC-8/-7. Consideration was given to altering the start time of the meeting, without consensus for any change to the meeting schedule. The matter will be further considered on the mailing list
These minutes were prepared by Geoff Huston; comments should be sent to iab-execd@iab.org. An online copy of these and other minutes is available at: http://www.iab.org/documents/IABmins/
The IAB Web page is at http://www.iab.org
|
Index of IAB Meeting Minutes |
|