IESG agenda: 2017-04-27

1. Administrivia

1.1 Roll call

1.2 Bash the agenda

1.3 Approval of the minutes of past telechats

1.4 List of remaining action items from last telechat

            OUTSTANDING TASKS

     Last updated: April 13, 2017

  o Alexey Melnikov to find a designated expert for RFC-ietf-urnbis-
    rfc2141bis-urn-22 Uniform Resource Names (URN) Namespaces [IANA 
    #957365].
    - Added 2017-04-13 (1 telechat ago)
          

2. Protocol actions

Reviews should focus on these questions: "Is this document a reasonable basis on which to build the salient part of the Internet infrastructure? If not, what changes would make it so?"

2.1 WG submissions

2.1.1 New items

IETF stream
draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-key-chain
Proposed Standard
Routing Key Chain YANG Data Model
Token
Alia Atlas (RTG area)
IANA review
Version Changed - Review Needed
Consensus
Yes
Reviews

IETF stream
draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview
Proposed Standard
Overview: Real Time Protocols for Browser-based Applications
Token
Adam Roach (ART area)
IANA review
IANA OK - No Actions Needed
Consensus
Yes
Reviews

IETF stream
draft-ietf-ipsecme-tcp-encaps
Proposed Standard
TCP Encapsulation of IKE and IPsec Packets
Token
Eric Rescorla (SEC area)
IANA review
IANA OK - No Actions Needed
Consensus
Yes
Reviews

IETF stream
draft-ietf-sipcore-status-unwanted
Proposed Standard
A SIP Response Code for Unwanted Calls
Token
Ben Campbell (ART area)
IANA review
IANA OK - Actions Needed
Consensus
Yes
Reviews

IETF stream
draft-ietf-core-links-json
Proposed Standard
Representing CoRE Formats in JSON and CBOR
Token
Alexey Melnikov (ART area)
IANA review
IANA - Not OK
Consensus
Yes
Reviews

2.1.2 Returning items

(None)

2.2 Individual submissions

2.2.1 New items

(None)

2.2.2 Returning items

IETF stream
draft-bchv-rfc6890bis
Best Current Practice
Updates to Special-Purpose IP Address Registries
Token
Suresh Krishnan (INT area)
IANA review
Version Changed - Review Needed
Consensus
Yes
Reviews

2.3 Status changes

2.3.1 New items

(None)

2.3.2 Returning items

(None)

3. Document actions

3.1 WG submissions

Reviews should focus on these questions: "Is this document a reasonable contribution to the area of Internet engineering which it covers? If not, what changes would make it so?"

3.1.1 New items

IETF stream
draft-ietf-i2nsf-problem-and-use-cases
Informational
I2NSF Problem Statement and Use cases
Token
Kathleen Moriarty (SEC area)
IANA review
Version Changed - Review Needed
Consensus
Yes
Reviews

3.1.2 Returning items

(None)

3.2 Individual submissions via AD

Reviews should focus on these questions: "Is this document a reasonable contribution to the area of Internet engineering which it covers? If not, what changes would make it so?"

3.2.1 New items

(None)

3.2.2 Returning items

(None)

3.3 Status changes

Reviews should focus on these questions: "Are the proposed changes to document status appropriate? Have all requirements for such a change been met? If not, what changes to the proposal would make it appropriate?"

3.3.1 New items

(None)

3.3.2 Returning items

(None)

3.4 IRTF and Independent Submission stream documents

The IESG will use RFC 5742 responses:

  1. The IESG has concluded that there is no conflict between this document and IETF work;
  2. The IESG has concluded that this work is related to IETF work done in WG <X>, but this relationship does not prevent publishing;
  3. The IESG has concluded that publication could potentially disrupt the IETF work done in WG <X> and recommends not publishing the document at this time;
  4. The IESG has concluded that this document violates IETF procedures for <Y> and should therefore not be published without IETF review and IESG approval; or
  5. The IESG has concluded that this document extends an IETF protocol in a way that requires IETF review and should therefore not be published without IETF review and IESG approval.

The document shepherd must propose one of these responses in the conflict-review document, and the document shepherd may supply text for an IESG Note in that document. The Area Director ballot positions indicate consensus with the response proposed by the document shepherd and agreement that the IESG should request inclusion of the IESG Note.

Other matters may be recorded in comments, and the comments will be passed on to the RFC Editor as community review of the document.

3.4.1 New items

(None)

3.4.2 Returning items

(None)

3.4.3 For action

Conflict review
conflict-review-pantos-http-live-streaming
IETF conflict review for draft-pantos-http-live-streaming
ISE Informational
draft-pantos-http-live-streaming
HTTP Live Streaming
Token
Alissa Cooper
IPR
Apple Inc.'s Statement about IPR related to draft-pantos-http-live-streaming-00
Emblaze Ltd.'s Statement about IPR related to draft-pantos-http-live-streaming-06
Emblaze Ltd.'s Statement about IPR related to draft-pantos-http-live-streaming-07
Emblaze Ltd.'s Statement about IPR related to draft-pantos-http-live-streaming

4. Working Group actions

4.1 WG creation

4.1.1 Proposed for IETF review

(None)

4.1.2 Proposed for approval

WG name
DKIM Crypto Update (dcrup)
Charter
charter-ietf-dcrup-(00-01)
Area
ART (Alexey Melnikov)

4.2 WG rechartering

4.2.1 Under evaluation for IETF review

WG name
IPv6 Operations (v6ops)
Charter
charter-ietf-v6ops-(04-01)
Area
OPS (Warren Kumari)

4.2.2 Proposed for approval

(None)

5. IAB news we can use

6. Management issues

6.1 [IANA #957518] Designated expert for RFC-ietf-oauth-amr-values (Amanda Baber/IANA)

6.2 Designated Experts for draft-ietf-urnbis-rfc2141bis-urn-22 (Alexey Melnikov)

6.3 New primary Designated Expert for "CoAP Option Numbers" and "CoAP Content-Formats" (Alexey Melnikov)

6.4 Reassignment of IMAP (TCP 143) and SMTP (TCP 25) port numbers (Alexey Melnikov)

6.5 RFC6338 early allocation request for user port/(service name) (Spencer Dawkins)

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