Skip to main content

Narrative Minutes interim-2020-iesg-01 2020-01-09 15:00

Meeting Narrative Minutes Internet Engineering Steering Group (iesg) IETF
Date and time 2020-01-09 15:00
Title Narrative Minutes interim-2020-iesg-01 2020-01-09 15:00
State (None)
Other versions plain text
Last updated 2024-02-23

Narrative minutes for the 2020-01-09 IESG Teleconference

These are not an official record of the meeting.
Narrative Scribe: Liz Flynn, Secretariat

1. Administrivia
1.1 Roll call

Deborah Brungard (AT&T) / Routing Area
Jenny Bui (AMS) / IETF Secretariat
Michelle Cotton (ICANN) / IANA Liaison
Alissa Cooper (Cisco) / IETF Chair, General Area
Roman Danyliw (CERT/SEI) / Security Area
Liz Flynn (AMS) / IETF Secretariat, Narrative Scribe
Sandy Ginoza (AMS) / RFC Editor Liaison
Ted Hardie (Google) / IAB Chair
Benjamin Kaduk (Akamai Technologies) / Security Area
Suresh Krishnan (Kaloom) / Internet Area
Mirja Kuehlewind (Ericsson) / Transport Area
Warren Kumari (Google) / Operations and Management Area
Barry Leiba (Futurewei Technologies) / Applications and Real-Time Area
Alexey Melnikov / Applications and Real-Time Area
Cindy Morgan (AMS) / IETF Secretariat
Alvaro Retana (Futurewei Technologies) / Routing Area
Adam Roach (Mozilla) / Applications and Real-Time Area
Amy Vezza (AMS) / IETF Secretariat
Martin Vigoureux (Nokia) / Routing Area
Eric Vyncke (Cisco) / Internet Area

Ignas Bagdonas (Equinix) /  Operations and Management Area
Jay Daley / IETF Executive Director
Wes Hardaker (USC/ISI) / IAB Liaison
Magnus Westerlund (Ericsson) / Transport Area


1.2 Bash the agenda

Amy: Does anyone have anything new to add to today's agenda? Any other changes?

1.3 Approval of the minutes of past telechats

Amy: Does anyone have an objection to the minutes of the December 19
teleconference being approved? Hearing none. I also saw updated narrative
minutes; any objection to approving those? Hearing none.

1.4 List of remaining action items from last telechat

     o Roman Danyliw to draft text to be posted on about reporting
       protocol vulnerabilities via an email alias and possible procedures
       on how to assign triage resources.

Roman: We're still in progress on that.

     o Eric Vyncke to write up draft text for the NomCom to help them
       understand the rules for the NomCom.

Eric: It's done; you can remove it.

     o Alexey Melnikov to think about how to analyze how successful WGs and
       protocols are and why they failed or not.

Amy: We'll mark this in progress for Alexey.

     o Martin Vigoureux with Wes, and Alvaro to work on some
       mechanism to obtain wider or private feedback from people who are
       disenfranchised; anonymous flagging of offensive emails to inform
       leadership; more opportunities for private feedback.

Martin: In progress.

     o Alvaro Retana with Warren, Alexey, Martin, Barry, and Roman
       to work on more transparency in the Datatracker about how long each
       phase of doc process takes / New datatracker flag to indicate who
       has the ball, area directors, authors, or chairs.

Roman: I thought the ball was with me; I was supposed to look into where we are
on putting counters on the dev roadmap and I need to do that. So, in progress.

     o Alexey Melnikov and Warren Kumari to add keyword tags to WG charters
       to identify specs that pertain to some general concept.

Warren: Still in progress.

     o Alvaro Retana to work on a framework for analyzing new proposals.

Alvaro: This one is in progress, as well as any other ones I have assigned.

     o Adam Roach to work on a virtual social room for remote attendees
       (promoting #hallway)

Adam: In progress. I need to get some text to Warren.

     o Warren Kumari to work on acknowledging shepherds, directorate
       reviewers in a more standardized/formal way.

Warren: Let's mark that in progress.

     o Alexey Melnikov to organize IoT overview discussion with interested

Amy: We'll mark this in progress for Alexey.

     o Ignas Bagdonas to write a draft of an IoT Systems charter.

Amy: We'll mark this in progress for Ignas.

     o Alexey Melnikov to find designated experts for RFC 8620 [IANA

Amy: This is on today as a management item so this is provisionally done.

     o Alvaro Retana and Adam Roach to look at updating the I-D Checklist.

Alvaro: That one is in progress.

     o Roman Danilyw to find designated experts for RFC-ietf-lamps-cms-mix-
       with-psk [IANA #1156116].

Roman: This is in progress; I have a note out but haven't heard back.

     o Roman Danilyw to find designated experts for RFC 8471 [IANA

Roman: Also in progress.

     o Eric Vyncke to write up draft text on Special Interest
       Groups and send to the IESG for comment.

Eric: Not yet started, so mark it in progress.

     o All IESG to submit their metrics data priorities to Roman (deadline
       January 16, 2020).

Amy: This is a reminder that your deadline for that is next week.

Roman: There are two google docs that I needed to unlock properly so you all
can edit. You can go in there and edit.

Warren: Would you mind sending out links to those again?

Roman: I will do it now.

     o Roman Danyliw to collect feedback from the IESG on the metrics
       data priorities for the IESG to discuss at a future meeting.

Amy: We'll mark this in process.

     o Ben Kaduk, Alvaro Retana, and Suresh Krishnan to skim the ietf@ietf
       list and collect a list of topics that seem to be the major concerns
       for the community from recent discussion threads.

Ben: Still in progress.

     o Martin Vigoureux to put together a proposal on disambiguating side
       meetings from IETF meetings.

Martin: In progress, please.

     o Magnus Westerlund to draft an IESG Statement regarding the IETF
       as the default change controller for IANA Registration requests.

Amy: We'll mark this in progress for Magnus.

     o Suresh Krishnan to draft a "best errata practices" document and
       post it on the IESG Wiki.

Suresh: That's in progress.

2. Protocol actions
2.1 WG submissions
2.1.1 New items

 o draft-ietf-ipsecme-qr-ikev2-10  - IETF stream
   Mixing Preshared Keys in IKEv2 for Post-quantum Resistance
   (Proposed Standard)
   Token: Benjamin Kaduk

Amy: There are no discusses in the tracker, so unless there's an objection now
it looks like this one is approved.

Ben: Let's put this in Revised ID Needed. There are some good comments and good
discussion from the authors on the list so we'll let that resolve itself.

 o draft-ietf-mboned-deprecate-interdomain-asm-06  - IETF stream
   Deprecating ASM for Interdomain Multicast (Best Current Practice)
   Token: Warren Kumari

Amy: There are no discusses in the tracker, so unless there's an objection now
it looks like this one is approved.

Warren: Thank you. Let's put it in Revised ID Needed; there were a bunch of
good comments and the authors seem responsive.

Amy: I have to ask -- it says [this document] has downrefs, but all the
downrefs are Proposed Standards. Those aren't actually downrefs, right?

Warren: I believe that's correct.

 o draft-ietf-jmap-websocket-04  - IETF stream
   A JSON Meta Application Protocol (JMAP) Subprotocol for WebSocket
   (Proposed Standard)
   Token: Alexey Melnikov

Amy: Alexey has indicated that the discussion is ongoing and he wants it to
stay in IESG Evaluation. Unless there's any discussion that needs to happen
now, it looks like that will continue over email.

2.1.2 Returning items


2.2 Individual submissions
2.2.1 New items


2.2.2 Returning items


2.3 Status changes
2.3.1 New items


2.3.2 Returning items


3. Document actions
3.1 WG submissions
3.1.1 New items

 o draft-ietf-mboned-ieee802-mcast-problems-11  - IETF stream
   Multicast Considerations over IEEE 802 Wireless Media
   Note: Note that this document is in the OPS area but as Warren
   Kumari is an author, Eric Vyncke (INT AD but also having worked on
   a similar document years ago) is the responsible AD.
   Token: Eric Vyncke

Amy: I have a number of Discusses in the tracker; do we need to discuss any of
those today?

Eric: I see two discusses; the one from Alissa is only for the first paragraph.
The other one is more of a comment. Is that right?

Alissa: The point is that overall these things taken together make me feel like
the document needs another pass. I only pulled out the ones from the review
that fell into that category, but I do think they all need to be fixed for the
document to be published.

Eric: I agree with you on this. The same thing for the comment from Roman. You
say section 9, section 7, 5.1; in 5.1 this is where the ARP point is discussed.
I wonder where the section 9 and 7 are coming from?

Roman: If I remember correctly, section 5 talks about a problem Section 7
recommends using the ARP sponge, and section 9 is the security considerations.
My feed back was why don't we mention some of the challenges with ARP poisoning
and related shenanigans in the security considerations, which is section 9. The
concept of ARP sponge is introduced in section 7 but it's introduced as a
mitigation for section 5.1.

Eric: Okay. And the last point from Mirja about the TSV review; I told the
author to fix all the comments from Gorry. He said one comment is too long and
we don't do it. For me it stays in IESG Evaluation, Revised ID Needed.

Ben: I did have one point that was not at Discuss level but I just wanted to
check. There's a statement that the document is intended to help make the
determination about what problem should be solved by the IETF and what problem
should be solved by the IEEE. I just didn't have a good sense if this is us the
IETF saying IEEE should do something and is this document the right way to do
that? It's a pretty informal statement so probably not. That's just in the
comments, section 1.

Warren: Speaking as an author, I think a fair amount of the original motivation
for this is simply to make IETF participants aware of the problems that exist
if they try and rely on multicast and broadcast. In certain environments,
namely wireless, things don't work the same as they do in wired ethernet, and
so you should know about this and not be surprised. Don't just assume you can
send a large amount multicast or broadcast and it will all be happy. So that
was the original motivation, just an informational [thing]. Maybe that got lost
and the document got viewed as more formal or official than that.

Ben: The main body text and stress of the document is as you describe; there's
just this one statement that was a little different so I thought I would ask
about it. But as I said it's not in the Discuss part of the ballot so I'm not
especially concerned about it.

Warren: Thank you. I was sort of responding to everyone and not you in

Eric: Anyway so I think we stay in IESG Evaluation and Revised ID until the
discuss points are resolved.

3.1.2 Returning items


3.2 Individual submissions via AD
3.2.1 New items


3.2.2 Returning items


3.3 Status changes
3.3.1 New items


3.3.2 Returning items


3.4 IRTF and Independent Submission stream documents
3.4.1 New items

 o conflict-review-irtf-icnrg-disaster-00
   IETF conflict review for draft-irtf-icnrg-disaster
     Research Directions for Using ICN in Disaster Scenarios (IRTF:
   Token: Eric Vyncke

Amy: I have no discusses in the tracker for this conflict review, so unless
there's an objection now this conflict review can go back to the IRSG.

Ben: Does anyone want to raise a flag about the text being 'standardized in the
IETF ICNRG,' or do we not care about 'standardized' in that usage? Sounds like

 o conflict-review-irtf-icnrg-terminology-00
   IETF conflict review for draft-irtf-icnrg-terminology
     Information-Centric Networking (ICN): CCNx and NDN Terminology
   (IRTF: Informational)
   Token: Mirja Kuehlewind

Amy: I have no discusses in the tracker for this conflict review, so unless
there's an objection now this no-problem message can go back to the IRSG. Okay,
hearing none, so this is approved.

3.4.2 Returning items


4. Working Group actions
4.1 WG creation
4.1.1 Proposed for IETF review


4.1.2 Proposed for approval


4.2 WG rechartering
4.2.1 Under evaluation for IETF review


4.2.2 Proposed for approval

 o IP Security Maintenance and Extensions (ipsecme)

Amy: I have no blocking comments, so unless there's an objection now it looks
like the updated charter is approved.

Ben: There appear to be no comments at all, so I think this is just approved

5. IAB news we can use

Mirja: I missed the call yesterday. From the minutes I know that they are in
the process of proposing a couple of new programs, so you might want to watch
out for that on the architecture-discuss list.

6. Management issues

6.1 (Updated) Designated Experts for "CMS Encapsulating Content Types" and "CMS
Inner Content Types" (RFC 7193) (Alexey)

Amy: At the last meeting we approved Russ Housley and Sean Turner as exeperts,
and Alexey wants to add Jim Schaad to the group. Any objections to adding Jim?
Hearing none, so it looks like he is approved and we will send official note to

6.2 Designated experts for RFC 8620 (Alexey Melnikov)

Amy: Alexey would like to appoint Neil Jenkins and Chris Newman as designated
experts for RFC 8620 registries. Any objection to appointing them? Hearing no
objection, so it looks like they are approved and we will send official note to

6.3 Executive Session: Take-down request: draft-anonymous-rtgwg-hlarp-00.txt
(Alissa Cooper)

7. Any Other Business (WG News, New Proposals, etc.)