1. Roll-call, agenda-bash, administrivia, approval of minutes [5 min]
Ron Bonica (IESG liaison to the IAB)
Aaron Falk (IRTF Chair)
Russ Housley (IETF Chair)
Olaf Kolkman (IAB Chair)
Dow Street (IAB Executive Director)
Glenn Kowack (RFC Editor Liaison)
Vittal Krishnamurthy (IAB Scribe)
Lynn St.Amour (ISOC Liaison)
1.2 Agenda bash
Olaf suggested that the ‘IAB Member Recusal’ discussion be moved to the next meeting. The group then selected “HTML 5” as the topic for the 10/6 techchat; Hannes will coordinate with Olaf to prepare material.
The agenda item of ‘IANA Licensing’ was moved to the Executive Session at the end of the meeting.
The members unanimously approved the appointment of Hannes as IAB Liaison to the IESG. Hannes will takeover for Danny, who is stepping down from this role. Olaf will send a note about the appointment to IESG.
Dow, Hannes and Olaf had an earlier offline discussion about how to simplify maintenance of the public IAB website, and make it easier for IAB members, project leads and program leads to directly post content. Olaf welcomed the board to send ideas or suggestions to him and Dow.
1.4. Meeting Minutes
No meeting minutes were reviewed during this call.
2. Liaison Reports
2.1. ISOC Liaison
Lynn did not participate in the call due to a schedule conflict. There was not a written report from ISOC this month.
2.2. IESG Liaison
Ron reported that the OAM workshop is on track. Six people are submitting papers for review, and around 25 people will be attending. Danny had earlier volunteered to review the papers. Hannes also volunteered, and John said he may be able to assist as well.
<begin IESG Liaison written report>
The IAB Joint Design Session on OAM is on schedule for October 12, 2010. It will be held on the campus of George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia.
So far six individuals have indicated intent to submit position papers. Two papers have already been received. Another twelve individuals have indicated that they will attend.
<end IESG Liaison written report>
2.3. RFC Editor Liaison
Glenn stated that he is working on the 5620bis document. He has sent parts of the draft to the RSAG, and intends to send the rest of the document in the next few days. He will then publish to the community and to the IAB a little later. His intention was to get a first round of feedback from the RSAG. He also noted that he will be sponsoring a couple of WebEx sessions to provide an introduction to 5620bis and allow for Q&A. As part of this activity, he intends to create a summary powerpoint presentation for the community.
Olaf suggested that Glenn send the completed draft to the RSAG and IAB in parallel, and he inquired as to the timeline. Glenn said that it would take a couple of days to get it to RSAG, and the rest of the activity could happen in parallel, probably next week.
<begin RFC Editor Liaison written report>
RFC Editor Report to the IAB
Wednesday, 22 September 2010
RFC Editor Operational Items
– Final August Statistics
– Sub: 29
– Pub: 36
August submissions are within normal variance, although the publication number is higher than usual (2009 monthly averages: subs 27; pubs 24).
– September Statistics to date (21 August)
– Sub: 19
– Pub: 18
With roughly 3/4 of the month behind us, September numbers are typical. (Note: mid-month numbers are of limited significance unless exceptional.)
T/RSE Activities This Period
I am just completing TRSE recommendations regarding the RSE position, and related, in the form of draft revisions to RFC 5620(bis). 5620bis includes the general responsibilities, authorities, and overall job description for the RSE. RSAG has been reviewing and commenting on elements of 5620bis, specifically the RSE hiring process. Remaining parts of 5620bis are going to RSAG shortly. After RSAG’s comments have been integrated, the full text will go to IAB and the community.
During today’s IAB business meeting, I would like to hear the IAB’s preference regarding their reviewing draft 5620bis before it goes to the community or at the same time.
Once there is initial feedback from the community and IAB re 5620bis, I will complete a separate and more detailed job description. I have already begun discussion with ISOC about obtaining access to HR resources in order to evaluate RSE salary requirement and inform the search process.
Per a request during the TRSE presentation in Maastricht, I intend to hold Webex sessions for 5620bis introduction and Q&A. A road map of major steps re community review will also be published. This should help reach a consensus more quicker and effectively.
– the RFC Citations RSE Committee chaired by Craig Partridge continues up and running.
This report was prepared with input from, and the participation of, Sandy Ginoza. Please let us know if you would like us to provide additional or different information.
<end RFC Editor Liaison written report>
2.4. IRTF Chair – Aaron Falk
Aaron reported that there was one, and possibly two, candidates for the IRTF chair. He clarified Russ’s question that he would be serving until March, and so the unavailability of a candidate until then would not impact the selection process. He said that there would be many more candidates before the Beijing meeting, giving interested IAB members a chance to chat with them. The selection of a new chair can then be made between Beijing and Prague. There were no objections to this timeline.
Dow enquired about the Cloud BOF situation, and whether next steps had been satisfactorily identified. Olaf mentioned that he would be in the lunch discussion at IETF. Spencer said that he and several others have been asking since the IETF 77 bar BOF in Anaheim what specific work on IETF protocols was being proposed, and they still don’t know the answer to that question, and so Spencer doesn’t understand how the IESG could consider chartering any BOF that doesn’t propose protocol work.
Olaf asked whether Dave Ward can come to this meeting, since Dave has experience in cloud computing and may be able to help identify specific areas of work. Hannes, with an example of Web 2.0, explained that work in cloud computing could be a set of multiple enhancements and usability improvements to existing cloud technology. Ross said that he will also try to find people to help in this area.
3. IANA Changes
The board had received notification from IANA of several change requests for DS records in the arpa zone:
Context: Emails with IANA change tickets:
Subject:[IAB] [IANA #391919] Add DS record for URN.ARPA to
ARPA zone (ouvpoy9mdv)
Subject:[IAB] [IANA #391920] Add DS record for IRIS.ARPA to
ARPA zone (pg7yomrv4e)
Subject:[IAB] [IANA #391921] Add DS record for IN-ADDR-SERVERS.
ARPA to ARPA zone (d34jqxd9x1)
Subject:[IAB] [IANA #391922] Add DS record for IP6.ARPA to
ARPA zone (p1oxbx2fi4)
Subject:[IAB] [IANA #391923] Add DS record for IP6-SERVERS.
ARPA to ARPA zone (eamls28a49)
Subject:[IAB] [IANA #391924] Add DS record for URI.ARPA to
ARPA zone (wck2hqclk8)
The members discussed and agreed to approve. In the future, they considered giving a blanket approval for this type of change, but still require explicit approval whenever there is a change in the delegation – e.g., when a new nameserver introduced. Olaf will notify IANA and approve these changes.
4. .sink / .local
At this point in the meeting the board entered into a long discussion of draft-jabley-sink-arpa. There was consensus that the current draft is lacking critical information that would need to be clarified before the IAB could make a decision to approve. They will ask the author, Joe Abley, to revise the document to include use cases and a clearer explanation of the goals.
Hannes will convey this information to the author via Ralph Droms.
5. IETF 79 Technical Plenary Update
After a detailed discussion, the board decided to drop the “Future of Web Applications” topic as the Beijing plenary, due primarily to schedule conflicts with key presenters. They discussed two other potential topics – “IPv6 Operational Experiences” and “Improving Communication between IETF and Research Community”. Marcelo wanted to know more about the content of the latter, and Hannes explained that there is a gap between the research community and standards community, and that it can be difficult to get researchers involved in standards activities. He wanted to know whether efforts to improve coordination here are the domain of IAB or IETF. Olaf clarified that this is a IAB job, and he asked the members whether this topic would be informative and of interest to the IETF audience. After some discussion, Olaf suggested that everyone think more on this and come up with ideas for the Beijing meeting.
The members then discussed a plenary about IPv6. The consensus was it would be informative to have a local expert talk about IPv6 related deployment or operational experiences. The board will also contact Comcast about a possible presentation.
For the IETF-Research topic, Marcelo suggested the members to look at Henning’s slides, and check whether Henning and Mark Handley will be in Beijing for a possible speaking slot. Hannes will follow-up with Henning. For the IPv6 topic, Danny and Andrei will contact Comcast, as well as several groups deploying IPv6 in China.
6. Privacy Workshop Update
Bernard reported that an announcement was sent on Monday, and that they have a list of action items including agenda planning, hotel arrangements, etc. The workshop will be held at MIT on 8-9 Dec., and will be co-sponsored by ISOC, W3C, and MIT CSAIL. He also mentioned that he has the funds from the IAB to cover snacks and other small items needed for the meeting.
7. Next Steps with the European Commission (EC)
Hannes mentioned that a meeting between EC and IESG, IAB, and IRTF is in the works. The purpose is to share information and talk about topics that are facing the Internet in the future. There will also be a presentation on the organization and processed of the IETF, to given EC participants an overview of how the IETF works.
Olaf and Hannes will work on the agenda, and Olaf will be sending a doodle poll to narrow down dates and participation. He mentioned that these EC groups deal with future internet technologies, so one goal is to provide background information on the IETF. The meeting is primarily a good-will exercise to open up better lines of communication, and that there may not be specific IAB commitments that result from this initial get-together. Hannes and Olaf both confirmed their availability to travel to Brussels.
8. IAB Chair Selection Procedures / Schedule
The results of the doodle poll that Olaf conducted show that a majority of IAB members prefer to keep chair selection in March instead of moving it to November. Olaf mentioned that Spencer was the only person who voted that selection *must* be held in November. Spencer stated that he was ok going along with the rest of the board, so it was agreed to keep IAB chair selection on the March-March cycle (corresponding with the March IETF meeting).
9. Appeal Responses and IAB Member Recusal
This item was deferred due to time constraints.
No other items were discussed.