Internet Architecture Board

RFC2850

IAB Minutes 2002-01-08

Home»Documents»Minutes»Minutes 2002»IAB Minutes 2002-01-08

IAB Meeting — January 8, 2002, 15h00-17h00 US-ET

ATTENDING

      John Klensin — IAB Chair
      Harald Alvestrand — IETF/IESG Chair
      Ran Atkinson
      Rob Austein
      Fred Baker
      Leslie Daigle
      Steve Deering
      Sally Floyd
      Geoff Huston
      Erik Nordmark — Liaison from the IESG
      Vern Paxson — IRTF Chair, liaison from the IRTF
      Henning Schulzrinne

    REGRETS:

      Steve Bellovin — Liaison to the IESG
      Brian Carpenter
      Jon Crowcroft
      Joyce K. Reynolds — Liaison from the RFC Editor
      Lynn St.Amour — Liaison from ISOC

NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING:

    Teleconference Tuesday February 12, 2002, 1500-1700 US-ET

AGENDA

    1. Acceptance of minutes of past meetings
      • December 11, 2001 (as circulated January 7, 2002)
    2. Review of Action Items (below)
    3. Review of current IAB documents (below)
    4. Liaison updates, including
      • ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 update
      • NomCom 2001 update
    5. ISOC BoT appointments — process?
    6. Discussion re. instructions to RIPE-NCC re. ENUM
    7. Revision to RFC 2436 (ITU cooperation document)
      • draft-fishman-2436bis-01.txt
    8. From the floor at IAB Open Plenary in SLC
      • update RFC2825?
      • technical exam of DMCA
    9. Guidelines for future IAB Plenary discussions

NOTES

    1. Acceptance of minutes of past meetings

      • December 11, 2001 (as circulated January 7, 2002)

      Accepted.

    2. Review of Action Items

      (below)

    3. Review of current IAB documents

      (below)

    4. Liaison updates

      IESG:

        Nothing in particular to report.

      IRTF:

        Plan: The IAB asks Vern to ask the NSRG for an interim report; the expectation is that this will mean the NSRG will review and revise the Eliot Lear draft in the light of producing something that describes the possibilities. If, upon review of the interim document, the IAB (still) has a specific concrete question to answer, a more specifically-focused effort might be tasked.

      ISOC:

        Neither Lynn St.Amour nor Brian Carpenter could make the call.

      W3C:

        3 new work proposals that they’ve posted to new-work; John Klensin will forward to IAB. IAB will look at and see if another coordination call with W3C is needed at this time.

      ITU:

        ENUM — “why we did what we did” draft is underway by John Klensin.

        Making progress on the RIPE-NCC instructions for handling e164.arpa requests.

      PSO:

        ETSI has posted comments on ALSC and ICANN Budget. Upon discussion, consensus is that there is no material comment to make as the PSO (i.e., within the PSO’s mandated scope of focussing on technical issues).

        On the question of the proposed ICANN by-law changes (to seat all Board members at the same time, at the end of the Annual Meeting), the consensus is that the PSO should have a position, and that the by-law changes are acceptable.

      NomCom 2001:

        Fred Baker, IAB liaison to the NomCom, reports that they are following standard process. The NomCom has asked if there are any particular skill sets that the IAB doesn’t have and would like to have added to it? None suggested. Fred reports that the NomCom seems to be a bit behind schedule, but is progressing well.

      ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 update:

        They have a letter ballot out as to whether they will offer us a Category C liaison; we (IAB) had agreed to a proposed Category A liaison. We’re waiting on the result of their ballot before deciding what, if anything, to do next.

    5. ISOC BoT appointments — process?

      Haven’t gotten the job description from ISOC for the Board of Trustee positions they’ve asked the IETF to fill. Geoff Huston suggests these need to be IETF representatives, not individuals selected by the IETF. Yet, as with any Board of Trustee position, there are individual liabilities. Need to worry about potential conflict of interest situations for the trustees (between IETF representation and ISOC directions). One possibility — appointees could be ex officio board members, appointed by IAB on behalf of the IETF and responsible to the IAB. Might then be ex officio IAB participants.

      [Lynn St.Amour joins for this discussion point.]

      The above concerns and proposal were outlined to Lynn, who deferred further comment until she’d had time to give it consideration. Lynn underscored the fact that they are specifically looking for technical depth on the Board.

      Discussion and a decision are planned for the next couple to 3 weeks.

    6. Discussion re. instructions to RIPE-NCC re. ENUM

      There are draft instructions being hammered out by Patrik Faltstrom et al. Henning Schulzrinne suggests that the free-form prose Patrik has sent around as explanation to the IAB could serve as a general intro to the instructions. John Klensin suggests that text would be useful as a lengthy introduction to the Internet-Draft form of it, but need to keep the specific instruction document crisp.

    7. Revision to RFC 2436 (ITU cooperation document)

        draft-fishman-2436bis-01.txt

      No one has looked at it. John Klensin declares last call deadline to be Thursday — preferrably before IESG call (11:30am US-ET). Leslie will send reminder e-mail.

    8. From the floor at IAB Open Plenary in SLC

      Update RFC2825?
      Fred Baker suggests: getting a report from the IESG on what has been done to fix the areas that the document identifies as specific problems. John Klensin suggests this requires also verifying integration from the INTLOC documents. John asks whether Erik Nordmark & Harald Alvestrand would support the idea of writing a report on the state of addressing RFC2825. John will write a question to the IESG via Erik/Harald.

      Technical exam of DMCA
      Shelved for now — too few available cycles.

      As a follow-on to both of these points, and how to handle them, John Klensin suggests we think about: are we out of the workshop business, or…? Haven’t done a full formal workshop in 2 years. Think about it and discuss on mailing list.

    9. Guidelines for future IAB Plenary discussions

      Based on informal feedback regarding the IAB plenary session in Salt Lake City, Ran Atkinson brings up the question of how to structure our sessions. In terms of managing mic resources, successful techniques include asking the specific question “what are your specific action items for the IAB?”. Should not be a “bully pulpit”. Leslie Daigle suggests putting up specific architecture questions, and getting the floor to speak to them (not floor-asks-questions/IAB-provides-response). John suggests we could, now, post a list of potential questions to IETF discuss, with a view to seeing if the community wants the longer IAB/IESG sessions in Minneapolis.

      [Out of time in teleconf. Let's take this to the list. ]

OLD ACTION ITEMS

  • Harald Alvestrand:
    Arrange “International Internet” workshop/series of meetings.

      [pre-May01]
      Ongoing
  • Rob Austein and Brian Carpenter:
    Review and potentially update RFC 1958.

      [pre-May01]
      Ongoing
        Draft text circulated to IAB for comment.
  • John Klensin:
    Talk to the IESG about IPR repository plan.

      [Aug01]
      Ongoing
        Revisited in January 2002 — status quo. John & Harald Alvestrand need to have a discussion with IESG & Secretariat. John & Harald are declared the committee to deal with this.
  • Leslie Daigle:
    Draft up IAB Considerations for CDI.

      [Oct01]
      Done
  • Brian Carpenter, Lynn St.Amour:
    Draft ISOC board member job description and requirements for IETF

      [Dec01]
      Ongoing
  • Leslie Daigle:
    Draft “IAB Considerations/Radiation symbol” text for glorp/shipworm work.

      [Dec01]
      Done
        Done, and proposal is to publish as (Informational) document — do we want the IESG to sign on? Thomas Narten had suggested some updates and that we circulate the document for comment. We will need a note to the IETF announce list to draw attention to it — “call for comments”. Harald Alvestrand offers the personal opinion that it works better as an IAB document, as opposed to joint IAB/IESG. General agreement — allows them to do review and hold it at arm’s length as a tool in their management. IESG will discuss whether they want to sign on. Leslie will submit the document as an Internet-Draft.
  • Ran Atkinson, Henning Schulzrinne:
    Read INTLOC documents and comment on their applicability as “Internationalization Considerations”.

      [Dec01]
      Ongoing
        John Klensin calls for it to happen in the next week or two.
  • Sally Floyd:
    First cut on “Architectural Considerations” document — a generalization of the discussions we’ve had about OPES, CDI, and glorp/shipworm.

      [Dec01]
      Ongoing

NEW ACTION ITEMS

  • John Klensin:
    ENUM background and motivation document

      [Jan02]

  • Henning Schulzrinne:
    (Definitive) history of the IETF

      [Jan02]
        Notes are together on Henning’s web page; he’ll last call it and see where we go from here.

IAB DRAFTS IN PROGRESS

FUTURE MEETINGS

    Regular teleconference second Tuesday of the month 1500-1700 US East Coast time.


These minutes were prepared by Leslie Daigle; comments should be sent to iab-execd@iab.org. An online copy of these and other minutes are available at http://www.iab.org/documents/IABmins.

Also, visit the IAB Web page at http://www.iab.org.