IETF STEERING GROUP (IESG) REPORT FROM THE TELECONFERENCE AUGUST 8TH, 1991 Reported by: Greg Vaudreuil, IESG Secretary This report contains - Meeting Agenda - Meeting Attendees - Meeting Notes Please contact IESG Secretary Greg Vaudreuil (iesg-secretary@nri.reston.va.us) for more details on any particular topic. 1. Meeting Attendees Callon, Ross / DEC Chiappa, Noel Gross, Philip / ANS Hobby, Russ / UC-DAVIS Hinden, Robert / BBN Reynolds, Joyce / ISI Stockman, Bernard / SUNET/NORDUnet Vaudreuil, Greg / CNRI Regrets Almquist, Philip / Consultant Borman, David / CRAY Crocker, Dave / DEC Crocker, Steve / TIS Coya, Steve / CNRI Davin, Chuck / MIT Estrada, Susan / CERFnet 2. Agenda 1) Administrivia - Bash the Agenda - Review of the Minutes - July 25th - July 30th - Aug 2nd. - Open Plenary Report 2) Review of Action Items 3) Protocol Actions - Review of protocol actions - TCP Large Windows - Router Discovery - BGP Minutes ------- 1. Administrivia 1.1 Agenda Bashing Discussion of technical Management issues including a review of the status of current working groups was deferred until a later teleconference. It was expected that the important line by line walk through of the BGP Usage document would require significant time. 1.2 Approval of the Minutes There were no completed minutes to review at this meeting. 2. Review of Action Items (89) Apr 25 [Russ Hobby] Resolve the conflict with the two version of the IMAP protocol. Russ Hobby is working to resolve the conflict in names between the two IMAP protocols. Hobby has exchanged mail with the authors of both IMAP RFC's and has yet to reach agreement with them. It is not clear that a resolution by picking the "one true IMAP" is possible. POSITION: In the absence of any agreement between the two authors of the IMAP protocol RFC's the IESG recommends that they the RFC editor declare that the IMAP protocol has "forked" and rename the two resulting protocols. ACTION: Hobby - Write a note to the RFC Editor expressing the sense of the IESG in regard to the IMAP protocols. (130) Jul 11 [Philip Almquist] Create a finished version of the TOS specification ready to be published as a Proposed Standard, as soon as possible. This action is still pending (133) Jul 11 [Phill Gross] Find one of the authors of the BGP usage document, and encourage it's rewrite. This action has been discharged. Phill Gross worked directly with Yakov Rekhter to rewrite the usage document. This action is discharged as it is currently written, but there will be other actions to get the set of BGP documents finally published. (139) Jul 18 [Dave Borman, Bernhard Stockman] Work together to redefine the scope of the existing DNS working group and possibly start a new DNS Operations group. It is not clear whether this action is still current. It has been folded into a later action #157 This action is still pending (141) Jul 18 [Greg Vaudreuil, Joyce Reynolds] Insure that the NISI working group charter is updated to reflect the addition of the following work item; write a document explaining the security issues of privacy and accuracy in Internet Databases. This action is still pending. (143) Jul 18 [Noel Chiappa] Chat with Geoff Stewart of Hale and Dore about continuing the research into the liability of standards making bodies. This action is still pending. (146) Jul 18 [Steve Coya, Greg Vaudreuil] Write the definitive IETF Handbook, to include material currently available in the guidelines to working group chairman, the guidelines to authors of internet drafts, and various draft IESG and IAB standards process documents. This action is still pending. (148) Jul 18 [Ross Callon] Send a more definitive explanation on the current status of the X.500 documents than is likely to recorded by the beleaguered IESG-Secretary in these minutes. This action is still pending. (152) Jul 25 [Greg Vaudreuil] Invite Steve Kent and the rest of the IAB to the Thursday IESG meeting to discuss IPSO. Include a list of topics to be covered. Preference is to have a resolution. This action has been concluded. (155) Jul 25 [Greg Vaudreuil] Schedule a discussion on the evolution of existing standards in a upcoming IESG meeting. This action is still pending (156) Jul 25 [Greg Vaudreuil] Send a list of current protocol actions as a regular attachment to the IESG Agenda. This was discharged for the first time with this teleconference. It will be deleted, and continued for future agenda's. (157) Jul 25 [Phill Gross, Susan Estrada] Explore the need for an operations DNS working group, and if needed, find a chair and write a charter for a DNS operation meeting, where close coordination with the protocol group is explicitly specified. This action is still pending the resolution of the current state of the DNS working group. It is still not clear whether the best path is to split the working group of keep a single focus of attention. (159) Jul 25 [Noel Chiappa, ] Work with Vaudreuil to state the IESG understanding of the creation of IP version 7 as a POSITION of the IESG. This is still pending. Approval of the July 25th minutes to which this action applies is still pending. (161) Aug 02 [Noel Chiappa] Investigate Kent's concern about the router discovery protocols actions in response to a new default router announcement. This action has been completed. Kent's objections are addressed in the current wording of the Router Discovery document. (162) Aug 02 [Greg Vaudreuil] Schedule a discussion in an upcoming IESG meeting on mechanisms for registering distinguished names. This action is still pending. (163) Aug 02 [Noel Chiappa, Bob Hinden] Investigate the progress and direction of the IPLPDN working group and report to the IESG. This action is still pending. 3. Protocol Actions 3.1 Review of protocol items The first comprehensive list of pending protocol actions was sent to the IESG. 3.1.1 Ethernet MIB The Ethernet MIB controversy still exists. ACTION: Vaudreuil -- Set up a teleconference for a 11 AM EST conference call on Ethernet MIB between Kastenholtz, Rose, Davin, Case, Gross, Vaudreuil, Chiappa 3.1.2 Security Guidelines A final Internet Draft version is ready to be published as an Internet Draft. This document was remanded back to the working group by the IAB. It's rewrite is nearing completion. 3.2 TCP Extensions for High Bandwidth*Delay paths. The executive director of the IAB notified the IESG that this recommendation would not be approved by the IAB. A technical "hole" was alluded to but no specifics were provided. This protocol was developed in a collaboration between Van Jacobsen\ LBL, the End to End Research Group and the IETF TCP Large Windows working group. ACTION: Gross - Send a message to the IAB expressing the desire of the IESG to have technical feedback on the TCP Large Windows protocol extensions. ACTION: Gross - Write a statement to the IAB expressing the need felt by the IESG for a public response to the public IESG recommendations to the IAB. ACTION: Vaudreuil -- Send all approved IESG Minutes to the IAB. ACTION: Vaudreuil -- IESG Minutes should have the Date of Approval and the Date sent to the IAB noted in the text. 3.3 Router Discovery Noel Chiappa reported that Steve Kent is satisfied, although not absolutely happy with the current wording of the Router Discovery document. A recommendation will be written for the next IESG meeting. 3.4 BGP A line by line review of the current BGP Usage document was undertaken. The interaction of BGP and IGP's was a subject of much discussion. Members of the IESG felt that documenting how BGP and IGP's interoperate was a valuable part of the usage document, and contained information extremely helpful in operating the routing system. It was not clear whether this information for each IGP was appropriate for the main body of the BGP Usage document or an appendix. POSITION: It is the opinion of the IESG that the Appendix A discussing the interaction with BGP and an IGP in some form should be in the included with the BGP Usage document, either in the appendix or in the body. ACTION: Gross -- Communicate the opinion of the IESG concerning the Interactions of BGP with IGP's to the authors of the BGP Usage document and integrate the useful Interaction information into the document. The IESG also felt that the document would benefit from an abstract, of the form normally required for Internet Drafts.