IETF 102 Plenary Montreal, Canada 2018 July 18, Wednesday 17:10-19:40 Two sets of minutes included below, one from Jean Mahoney and one from Niels ten Oever. (1) Minutes taken by Jean Mahoney =================================== ----------------------------------- Welcome - Alissa Cooper, IETF Chair Presentation: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/102/materials/slides-102-ietf-sessa-ietf-102-chair-slides-alissa-cooper-00 Alissa welcomed everyone to the IETF 102 plenary and thanked meeting host Juniper Networks. ----------------------------------- IRTF Chair Report - Allison Mankin www.irtf.org Allison Mankin highlighted the Applied Networking Research Workshop (ANRW) that was held during IETF this week, and thanked AMS for their work on scheduling the sessions. She asked for the feedback. Comments: Sean Turner - I thought it was great. I really liked the TLS session. Resist the urge to put it on Friday in the future. Aaron Falk - I show people new to the IETF Sharon Goldberg's slides on how to help new people get traction in IETF, posted on the proceedings page. ----------------------------------- Administrative topics - Glenn Deen, Portia Wenze-Danley Presentation: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/102/materials/slides-102-ietf-sessa-iaoc-and-iad-report-glenn-deen-portia-wenze-danley-00 Portia Wenze-Danley voiced appreciation and thanks to the meeting sponsors, Code Sprint participants and NOC volunteers. Negotiations are underway for a global host for IETF 103 in Bangkok. The local host is Th.nic. For hosting opportunities, contact Ken Boyden. Glenn Deen announced that Andrew Sullivan has stepped down from the IAOC chair, and that he has been selected as the new chair. The IAOC is in a keep-the-lights-on mode while the IETF LLC is being set up. The IOAC will dissolve and be replaced by the LLC. Glenn thanked Andrew Sullivan and Kathy Brown, who is retiring. Glenn discussed the meeting fee increases and noted that Thailand is a new venue, so each attendee should look at his or her individual visa situation. ----------------------------------- NomCom report - Scott Mansfield Presentation - https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/102/materials/slides-102-ietf-sessa-ietf-nomcom-update-ietf-102-scott-mansfield-00 Scott Mansfield highlighted that this NomCom would be selecting board members for the IETF LLC and urged the community to exercise their professional networks to identify good candidates. ----------------------------------- In memoriam - Bob Braden Allison Mankin remembered Bob Braden, who took over the RFC editor position in 1998 after the death of Jon Postel. Bob worked on the End-to-End Task Force and the the research group RSVP. He was supremely dedicated to the Internet and IETF, and was known for his humor and willingness to teach. Philip Prindeville recalled Bob's patience and insight and credited Bob with his being here today. Bob Moskowitz said that we have a motto that says, "IETF - making the Internet work better". When he thinks of Bob, he thinks, "Making the Internet work." ----------------------------------- Jonathan B. Postel Award - Kathy Brown Presentation: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/102/materials/slides-102-ietf-sessa-2018-jonathan-b-postel-service-award-00 Kathy Brown presented the award to Steven G. Huter for his leadership and personal contributions to the Network Startup Resource Center, which enabled countless others to develop the Internet in more than 120 countries. ----------------------------------- Recognition Alissa Cooper recognized Kathy Brown for her contributions as Internet Society President and CEO. ----------------------------------- IAB open mic session Barry Lieba - What are you planning to do about the RFC series? Heather Flanagan - First - we are changing the format and are actively testing the tools. When the tools work for the production center, we will ask the community to test, sometime around the next meeting. Other projects - I want to try and do RFCs that are actual HTML. Set them up in a sandbox where we can annotate with errata and see if this will cause problems. We can improve the RFC metadata, then they will be more easily indexed in other organizations. First priority is to publish documents. If any of the projects impact the rate of publication, I will only do them with a lot of consultation. Aaron Falk - I'm part of the RFC Editorial Board. There's another group called the RFC Series Oversight Committee serving under the IAB. What's the relationship between RSOC and the IAB and their involvement in the RFC++ BoF. Is it true that the entire group is up for replacement? Ted Hardie - the RSOC is an IAB program. It's part of how the IAB maintains long-term commitments that may extend beyond the tenure of any IAB member. RSOC will be part of oversight of the RFC series. There is a call for new and continuing volunteers for the RSOC - interviews are happening this week. The IAB calls for volunteers all the time for different things. Appointments will be after interviews and the call for comments. Robert Sparks - The defining docs talk about why the RSOC is a separate body. It is managed like a IAB program but is a little be more than a program. When we sent out the call for volunteers, we realized it had been a very long time since everyone had been evaluated, so the IAB is evaluating everyone willing to continue. It was expected to be a stable body for continuity of information. If there is concern that this is a clear-the-slate activity - it is not. It's exercising the responsibility the IAB has for overseeing RSOC itself. Aaron Falk - Any terms that ensures continuity? Robert Sparks - No terms. The document that created the RSOC has the principles how the IAB should manage the constituency. Ted Hardie - That RFC is 6635. We did not coordinate with the RSOC in advance on the BoF. We apologize. Aaron Falk - So do you think if the IAB talked to RSOC and the RSOC talked to the RFC editor, that could have been a reasonable way for the BoF concerns to be addressed? Ted Hardie - The RSE has a role for thinking about the evolution of the RFC series. There is a role for the whole community to think about it. This problem has been called to the IAB attention in the past. For example there was the BCP effort that came from external bodies. There's not a limitation on who can suggest changes. The discussion needs to be public. Some of the external coordination that should have happened before the public discussion didn't happen. Phillip Hallam-Baker - We need something that is between an Internet-Draft and an RFC. People ask for an RFC when they just want something permanent to point to. There should be something less than an RFC. Heather Flanagan - It's interesting idea. I'm hesitant, but willing to explore. You're introducing confusion to solve confusion. It's not a no, though. We have to be careful. Richard Barnes - Continuity of information - I worry about stagnation and lack of new blood. The IAB should keep that in mind. Having regular turnover - you establish process for handoffs. Multi-stakeholder decisions - Heather and IAB - what are the set of stake holders for RFC Series? are you getting feedback from the stake holders? Heather Flanagan - I want to talk to anyone who is technical enough to know about them and incorporate them. I'm not full time on this. I have contacts with many organizations - national research and education networks, network operator groups, corporate entities, reaching out to open source communities. I'm open to anything. Ted Hardie - There are two classes of stake holders - producers and consumers. It's easier to talk to producers. It's easy to look at the production. And harder to pull in consumers. Heather is taking on outreach. Adam Roach suggested the open source community. Richard Barnes - The consumer stakeholder group is the Internet community, numbered in the millions. You should innovate in collecting data. Heather Flanagan - I'm talking to marketing and communication at ISOC. Asking how does one do a survey. I can't talk to everyone. Your point is well taken. Bob Hinden - I appreciate the apology, but I want to chastise the IAB. RFC 6635 section 2.1 defines the RFC editor. The IAB should not have taken it on. You overstepped your responsibility. Your apology didn't go far enough. You should have asked the RFC editor to look at the issue. You should not have done a BoF, the IESG shouldn't have approved it. You are supposedly very busy and you did this in the rush. This was not a good performance. Leslie Daigle - The community should do well to remember that for a number of years, the RFC series was published by ISI, funded by ISOC as a separate activity before IASA. It moved to IETF, and there were concerns about how could it remain independent. The IAB looks after the RFC for the IETF community. How to make sure the RSE was adequately supported? Hence the RSOC was constituted not to be an IAB committee, but independent of the IAB. It's great to review them. It's not just an IAB thing to twiddle with the BoF. It's larger than the IETF. and has a rich history all its own that people in this room should make themselves aware of. Ted Hardie - To clarify, the ISE has a advice board distinct from RSOC. The IAB was thinking of the evolution for IETF and IRTF. That concern was not well expressed. The evolution of the streams when we look at beyond the iETF. The movement into 4 streams has started but is not completed. Needed to think as a tech community: do we push, let it evolve, or limit that change to keep the streams together? Leslie Daigle - excellent conversation to have. They should read the RFCs. Ted Hardy - thanks and suggestions welcome. Andrew Sullivan - Thanks to IAB and IESG for approving the BoF, it was useful. Not because it was perfect. Because this is something that is talked in rooms and not in public. This is a way to talk to each other. It was another plenary. It was a fine thing to do. I understand that people didn't think it was well executed. It took bravery on your part. Lucy Lynch - I want to change the topic slightly to transparency. I would like the iAB to publish their agendas and open their calls. Ted Hardie - minutes are public. Lucy Lynch - and are after the fact. Ann Bennett - If I have comments on the RFC++ BoF, where do I post comments? Alissa Cooper - The rfcpluslus list is closed. Ted Hardie - Post to the rfc-interest list. Heather Flanagan - The rfc2xml-dev list will be a good resource when the tools are released for testing. Philip Prindeville - Will the ANRW be a regular thing at the IETF? Allison Mankin - It is our 3rd iteration. First at the IETF rather than the week before. We are making plans for the next one, and it will also be concurrent. Shane Kerr - I've been to a lot of side meetings, 20-30 people. I've noticed we are having meetings without agendas and minutes, and remote people can't participate. Ted Hardie - That's a question for IESG and an excellent segue. I will ask the IESG to come up. Shane Kerr - Since people are limited to two BoFs, people are afraid to waste them. And you have to register bar BoFs. It should be easier to have an official gathering that doesn't run into these issues. ----------------------------------- IESG open mic session Alissa Cooper - We have wrestled with this topic. What's an official meeting? IESG has created side meeting rooms to facilitate ad-hoc discussion, but no remote support. There were more and more bar bofs in these rooms, we wanted a drawn a brighter line, sounds like it hasn't entirely worked. Mirja Kühlewind - in the wiki you can see that a room is reserved. This is a valued part of a face-to-face meeting. How to get this back to the whole community if you have ideas. Shane Kerr - Removing the two BoF limit might be a good start. It has annoyed me for years. Alissa Cooper - There are conversations happening about what is displayed as agenda on the Datatracker, what is shown or not. Spencer Dawkins - The IESG has been talking about it for a while. We talked about HotRFC on Sunday night. Aaron Falk has been thinking a lot about that. As for the two BoF limit - it would take one sentence to change BCP 25 to say it applies to two WG-forming BoFs. Barry Lieba - We have done more than 2 IASA2.0 BoFs. IESG has gotten better at doing the right thing. Shane mentioned remote participation and minutes. The side meetings are not connected to that. IESG should be more lenient when scheduling BoFs so that they can be available. I really liked that the RFC++ BoF was conflict free. Do that for other Gen area BoFs. Aaron Falk - I'm in transport area, and it's obsessed with finding a transport AD. I know you are trying to reduce workload. Is that what you are doing? Is it down to 1/2 time? What's not getting done? Is it working? Adam Roach - We have a mix of people - some are working half time, some full time. I'm full time. We can cover the ART area. We've given instructions to the NomCom, we can have some half-time ADs but not all the ADs can be half-time. Warren Kumari - The first year I was overwhelmed 35-40 hours a week. Depends on how efficient you are. I may procrastinate. I think I can keep up with my working group. Ben Campbell - I'm 4th year, I'm not doing 50%. I think it's doable. I pay a little less attention to drafts outside of my expertise. I'm more squeaky wheel driven. Have not had complaints. Alvaro Retana - We also need to talk about BoFs and agendas. The load varies quite a bit. Keep that it mind. Eric Rescorla - I suggest you stand for Transport AD. Aaron Falk - I'm hearing that it's a full-time job. Terry Manderson - if you don't want Transport, you could stand for Int area AD. Being an AD will chew up as much time as you give it. Job Snijders - I've noticed a significant number of standards track documents without implementation reports or running code sections. I want to encourage people to document this. Not asking for open source, just running code. If running code is not demonstrated, why is the IESG reviewing? (applause) Alvaro Retana - I agree with you. In the Routing Area, there are several working groups that require implementation. In some cases it's more important, in others not. Waiting for an implementation may take awhile. If you think the process needs to change, write up a draft. Warren Kumari - It's handled on a working group basis or case by case. When we discussed it in DNSOPs, I was reluctant. I wrote a document that was implemented at the Hackathon, and the implementers gave feedback. That has value. Eric Rescorla - I think implementations are important, but shouldn't be confused with implementation reports. 7-10 implementations of TLS and QUIC. I would be sad to spend all that time to doc all of it. Job Snijders - I can sympathize with WG by WG basis, but maybe it should be a WG by WG opt-out. Ben Campbell - this should be WG by WG. I am nervous about putting more structural barriers to getting drafts out. The difference between Proposed Standard and Internet Standard is that Internet Standard requires at least two interoperable implementations. We should talk about progressing more documents to IS. Warren Kumari - Write it up in a draft and we can discuss it. RFC 1264 created implementation report requirement and RFC 4794 got rid of it. Kerry Lynn - Can we use Meetecho to include remote people on the Friday meetings in Bangkok? This could extend into following weekend. Thoughts on resources? Alissa Cooper - Some rooms will have Meetecho and projectors. More flexible to schedule ad-hoc Mirja Kühlewind - very unstructured - it's an experiment, research groups are taking the opportunity to hold meetings. Phillip Hallam-Baker - This has been one of the best IETF meeting I've been to. We're not running out of snacks, all the meeting rooms are reasonable size. Congratulations to the people who organized this. HotRFC connected me to other people - that's an experiment that works. As for ad-hoc meetings - if I'm designing protocol, I don't invite 100 people. You don't need 100 designers, you need 100 deployers. A small group can work on a focused thing alone. When people do that, the decisions that they made need to be consented by people not in the meeting. Alissa Cooper - This venue is great because it has small spaces. John Klensin - We are seeing more remote participants. We have procedural bars to treating the remote participants as full participants. When will that be addressed? Also, that appeal you mentioned --- Alissa Cooper - can you elaborate on the barriers? John Klensin - NomCom eligibility rules - things tied to that. Semi informal meetings that don't allow remote participation. I'm not looking for a solution. Just is the IESG considering the importance and time frame? Alissa Cooper - We are supportive of remote participation. It brings people in. We want to optimize for people in the room, and we don't have to make that tradeoff often. The NomCom issue is a real one. We need to talk about it and address this in the future. John Klensin - I hope it will not get postponed for ever. Alissa Cooper - As for the appeal, we are discussing it and working on response, which will be out in August. Glenn Deen - As someone who has to find a side meeting - how to find the meeting? We do it in email, but that gets lost in clutter. A slot on the official agenda would be really useful. A bigger part of community could become aware of it. Alissa Cooper - I couldn't agree more. Kathleen Moriarty - Have you considered reissuing the ballot on the conflict review since so much research and discussion has happened? It would be easy. Alissa Cooper - I can't speak to the details about it since it's in process. Kathleen Moriarty - It was just a suggestion. unidentified speaker - It was great having ANRW during this week. Also, AMS is recycling badges. Fill the bin with badges on Friday. ----------------------------------- IAOC open mic session Mike StJohns - I miss the larger IETF logo on our badges, can we get them back? Glenn Deen - We will make note of it. I do not know why they got smaller. Bob Hinden - Congratulations and condolences. This is a great venue. We should come back again and again. (applause) Glenn Deen - I agree. I love the huge amount of open seating so we can sit down and talk to each us. (applause) Terry Manderson - I love the space, but the bar hours are shocking. Glenn Deen - The Montreal bars stay open until 3 am. Terry Manderson - It's not the end time, it's the start time. (laugher, applause) Ivan Bogdanovic - I like the rotation to other countries. But travel to Asia in November is expensive and companies cut spending at the end of the year. Have more expensive meetings in the beginning of the year. Glenn Deen - We have seen that as well. We are booked out until 2021, but past that we are looking at Asia in March. Bob Hinden - That's a very one-region view of it. It's about balancing the pain. Glen Deen - We will experiment to see how it goes. The big thing that impacts our choice is the availability of venues that match the IETF requirements, but if we meet in March, there may be new venues available in Asia. John Levine - This may well be the last time you ever see the IAOC (applause) Glenn Deen - I will be the shortest-serving IAOC chair ever. Alissa Cooper - Thanks, everyone. (2) Minutes taken by Niels ten Oever =================================== Alissa Cooper - IETF Chair - We changed the dates and meeting location because of visa issues. From SF last week to this week here in Montreal. - We introduced Chromebooks. Thanks for the secretariat to make that happen. - There is no technical plenary - Thanks to Meeting Host Juniper - Statistic from people on-site. - We see a continuing trend of decreasing attendance. - Hackathon took place on Saturday and Sunday, new attendance record with 227 on-site attendees. There will be another one in Bangkok at IETF103 - We ran a new version of hotRFC. 10 talks, 120+ attendees. Should we do this again? What should we change? - IASA 2.0 update - refactoring IETF administrative arrangements - Plan to create LLC - WG consensus on board structure - Before September 1 final review of legal docs - In August execution of legal docs to create LLC before new ISOC director starts - IETF103 Agenda expiriment - no WG meetings on Fridays - Looking for feedback + more agenda expiriments - Reminded for respectful behavior Allison Mankin - IRTF Chair - ANRW took place during IETF to have researchers partake in IETF - Attendees thought it was a great success - Environment was very conducive and inspiring Sean Turner: - I thought ANRW was great, especially TLS session, resist the urge to put it on Friday [applause for AMS schedulers] Aaron Falk: - Comment Sharon Goldberg for introduction for academics in IETF Portia Wenze-Danley - Administrative Director - Got to work with more ppl, and know more ppl - Thank you to host+sponsors - Venue was great - Thanks for Systers lunch sponsors - Thanks for codesprinters + datatracker - Negotiating for new local hosts for Bangkok - Thank you Glenn Deen - IAOC chair - Andrew Sullivan could not be IAOC chair because he becomes ISOC chair, he remains member though - IAOC chose me a new chair - In 'keep lights on' mode pending IASA2.0 - Thanks to Kathy Brown and Andrew Sullivan - MTGVENUE documents are going through RFC publication now, being implemented as well - Meeting dates 2023-2028 are out - No early bird fee increase (remain $700 USD), but early birds need to be earlier - Standards rate will be $ 875 USD - Late rate will be $1000 USD - Check your visa requirements for Thailand, if your visa does not come through fee will be refunded Scott Mansfield - NomCom Chair - New nomcom composition - Chair is non-voting Allison Mankin - IRTF Chair - In Memoriam Bob Braden - Served as RFC editor with Joyce Renolds after Jon Postel passed away - Fierce advocate for Internet multimedia, and active in end-to-end taskforce - Was never a professor, but always a teacher Phil Prindeville - Was working on validating/invalidating options, Bob helped me understand what wasn't stated in the RFC. It isn't a stretch to say that I was not here without him. - Has been 30 years and 1 week since my last IETF Bob Moskowitz - Bob Braden made Internet work Allison Mankin - IRTF Chair - With dedication and humour. Kathy Brown - ISOC CEO - Jonathan B. Postel Award - 17 times award has been handed out - Now Steven G. Hiter wins it. - Prize is stuck in customs Alissa Cooper - IETF Chair - Recognition Kathy Brown IAB Ted Hardie- IAB Chair - Christian Huitema could not join because a death in the family, our thoughts are with him and his family. Barry Leiba - Heather, what are you planning to do about the RFC-series Heather Flannigan - I have a list, it is rather long. Working on chaning RFC format. Been working on it for quite some time. Now testing the tools. Working on running code. Hope to get it to production center ready, then the community will be testing. Aim for community testing during next meeting. - Other projects: -- Annotate RFCs with errata? -- Sandbox expiriments -- Expiriment with metadata in documents, makes indexing by others easier -- Publishing documents always comes first, other projects come after that Aaron Falk - Trying to get information. Used to be part of RFC editor, now part of the RSE, there is also RSOC. Can you elaborate on relation between IAB and RSOC, and the involvement RFC++ BoF. Is RSOC up for replacement? Ted Hardie - RSOC is committee of IAB - There is an RFC on that (RFC6635) - RSOC aims to provide continuity over IAB chairs - Currently call for volunteers - Interviews going on this week - IAB calls for volunteers all the time - Appointment process goes forward Robert Sparks - RSOC is a bit more than a programme than it is defined - When get called for volunteers, we realized it was a long time we did an evaluation - Therefore we evaluated all members of the RSOC - The main reason for having RSOC as seperate body was because continuity, therefore stability important - This was not a clear the slate intended activity, not the case at all - Excercising responsibility of IAB to oversee RSOC Aaron Falk: - Are there mechanisms? Robert Sparks - there are no terms - RFC6635 has the terms Ted Hardie - IAB did not coordinate with RSOC on the BoF - We apologize for this Aaron Falk - Could better coordinating prevented the BoF? - Trying to understand the role of the RSOC Ted Hardie - The RSOC and RSE have particular roles, also role for the community - There is no limitation on who can suggest changes - All discussions need to be public - External coordination that should have happened before BoF did not occur. Phil Hallam-Baker - We look at RFC series, there is this frame how do we fix RFCs. We might need something in between I-D and RFC. - People want to something permanent, rather than redoing RFCs, we maybe need to make smth in between Heather Flanagan - Interesting idea, we should explore - A bit hesitant - We might create more confusion Richard Barnes - Stagnation is a constant problem in groups. - I encourage the IAB to think about getting new blood in oversight bodies - Question: multistakeholderism, having all kind of people represented isi mportant, who does Heather think are the stakeholders for the RFC-series Heather Flanagan - I wanna talk to everyone who can spell 'RFC' - I have a lot of contact with operators, publishers, science foundations. I leverage networks from other parts of my professional job. Am open to pretty much everything. Ted Hardie - There are two classes: authors and readers - Easier to reach out to authors because we have stream managers together at one time - It is extremely difficult who may be the consumers of the RFCs - Heather is taking on outreach, Adam mentioned open source communities, we hope to gather more data Bob Hinden - Have been involved. - I accept the apologies but I want to chastize the IAB - Reading from RFC6635 - IAB overstepped - You should not have done a BoF Leslie Daigle - RFC was run from ISI, was funded by ISOC - As part of the admin construction - IAB looks out after RFC series for Internet community, not just ppl here - RSOC is not constituted to be IAB programme, but be an independent oversight body Andrew Sullivan - Thank you for this BoF, not because it was perfect, or because it was finished, but because it was done in public - It creates feelings, it has history, but it is good we came together. [?] - I like people showing their work, that is why I like the archival work - That is why I hope IAB publishes their lists, minutes and their calls Ted Hardie - I take your point and take it into consideration Anne Bennett - Feelings around the BoF, should they be posted to the RFC++ mailinglist? Alissa Cooper - IETF Chair - RFC++ mailinglist is closed Ted Hardie - Discussion should be happening on the rfc-interest list Heather Flanagan - I am trying to focus the rfc-interest list, there is also an rfc-dev list. operational format work is expected to happen there. Ted Hardie Phil Prindeville - I attended the ANRW, as someone who dabbled in security I appreciate it that the academic present told me about what I do wrong. Is this going to be a regular thibg? Allison Mankin - This is the third iteration, but first time during the week. THis was idea of programme chairs. We already have the logo for ANRW 2019. Meeting will be concurrent with IETF, here in Montreal. Shane Kerr - There have been a lot of side-meetings at the venue this week, that were highly relevant for WGs. I notice a trend towards this. - We start having meetings without agenda's, without remote participation, this is a semi-formal thing in the IETF. Ted Hardie - This is a question for the IESG, so I ask them to come on stage. IESG Shane Kerr: - With BoF there is a restriction, so that is why people have Bar BoF's, so that is why people have meetings. It is easier to have some sort of official gathering that doesn't run into these issues. That is my observation. Alissa Cooper - IETF Chair - Two members of IESG were not able to make it: Suresk Krishan had a death in the familiy, SPencer Dawkins had a familiy health emergency. - In response to Shane. This is a topic we have been wrestling with as long as I have been on IESG. What we have done to faciliate this is create side meeting rooms, that do not have projectors or remote participation. Aimed at interaction between smaller groups. They have a light sign-up procedure and people can ad hoc announce them on mailinglists. - It started to seem to us that Bar BoFs looked more and more like BoFs. That is why we have tried to make the line clearer. THat was the idea, we may have failed. Mirja Kuehlewind - You can see in the wiki what is reserved, I see it is not fully transparent - But having a side meeting is useful, so we can get work back at the right time to the community Shane Kerr - Maybe removing the two BoF limit might be a good start? Alissa Cooper - IETF chair - Some conversations have started about display of agenda. There was unclarity there, seems like a thing ready for evoltion Spencer Dawkins - The IESG has been talking about this for a while, also resulted in hotRFC Barry Leiba - IESG should be more lenient in making more than two BoFs - I rly like that the RFC++ BoF did not conflict with anything - The first edition of a GEN area BoF should be a conflict free as possible Aaron Falk - Been hard to find Transport ADs - I am wondering how / if IESG is making workload lighter? Adam Roach - We have a mix of ppl. Some ppl are working full-time, some half-time. Between ART ADs we can sort it. We can make that balance. We have given instructions to NomCom that we can have some ppl full-time, not all. Aaron Falk - Do you have enough time to know what is going on? Or is it benign neglect? Warren Kumari - Depends also how long you have been doing this for. For me it is like 35 hours per week. I think I am keeping up with the work, chairs have not complained yet. Ben Campbell - Am in my fourth year and used to be 75% to full time, now needed to push that down to 50%. It is doable. Bit less attention for I-Ds outside my expertise, leave that to other ADs. In terms of WGs have become a bit more squaky wheels driven. [?] - Load varies quite a bit in time, per bit, per topic. It is a lot more than telechats. Also depends what you want to be involved in. Eric Rescorla - You should become transport AD - Be the change you want to see in the world Aaron Job Snijders - Noticed that there is a stream of docs on the STD track tha do not raise awareness of running code, nor have implementation report. - For each normative report an operator should indicate compliance - This is extremely helpful for operational considerations - This means that I want to promote running code before things get submitted to IESG - I know tihs is chicken and egg, and want to stimulate people to put money where there money is - Not asking for open source, but asking for running code - STD is for interoperability, so with what? - IESG should give more importance to running code and their status Alvaro Retana - I agree, in principle. - We are at IETF, we believe in running code. - In the RTG area some WGs require implementations - In some cases it might make sense, in others not. - Waiting for implementation might take too long Warren Kumari - WG by WG basis, and doc by doc basis - I was hesitant when this was proposed in DNSOP, but showed to be useful. Even if it is not a formal implementation but work from the hackathon Eric Rescorla - Implementation is different from implementation report - Not enough value to write something for every normative value Job Snijders - Maybe it should be WG op-out instead of opt-in Ben Campbell - Am against adding new obstacles - Between proposed STD and STD is requires interop implementations Job Snijders - In both IDR and DNSops we have no Internet Standards, but only Proposed Internet Standards - I'd love ot see more work at earlier stages. [?} - More agenda expirimentation is expected. Are external people considered? - If this is a new trend, and things moving over to Friday and weekend, how do we think about structure and resources? Allissa Cooper - IETF chair - We plan to have Meetecho and projectors, but people have ability to sign up Mirja Kuehlewind - Expiriment is unstructured, excited to see what will happen. Phil Hallam-Baker - This has been one of the best meetings. Food never ran out, meetings were right size. - Wanted to thank Aaron for organizing hotRFC because it connected me to ppl who are interested into ideas I presented outside of SEC area. That is an expiriment that does work - I come to IETF not to design with 100 ppl, but 100 bought in to deploy it. - A small group might go off and work on a focus thing. That is how you ship fast. But when ppl do that, the decisions that they make in that kabal, that is a proposal they made in private, to not waste time designing things in a forum. Alissa Cooper - IETF chair - This meeting was so great because there are so many places where ppl can meet. John Klensin - As we look at participation figures, we increasing remote participation - There are procedural bars to seeing remote participants as full participants. When will IESG address that question. NomCom doesn't allow remote participants, we do have semi-formal meetings that do not allow remote participation. Am asking if IESG will address this. - You mentioned during your summary that there is an appeal pending. That has to do with openness of the leadership process. Alissa Cooper - IETF chair - IESG is fully supportive of remote participation facilitation to support ppl who canno make it to the meetings. - If we have to choose to optimize for in the room or out the room we do the former [?] - There are other admin matter before the IETF, but we will try to address. John klensin - Am not chastizing, I just hope this won't be postponed forever. Alissa Cooper - IETF chair - We are discussing the appeal, working on response, intend to have it out in August. Glenn Deen - I hope it can be clearer where meetings are. It would be very useful if they are on official agenda, even if it is no official meeting. that would be a big help. Daniel Migault - ANRW was great to mix communities - AMS has set up recycle badges bin, I hope we fill this bin. Put your badge in this bin on Friday. IAOC Mike StJohns - I miss the larger IETF logo on the badges. Why did it shrink or can we get it back? Glenn Deen - I will look into it Bob Hinden - Congratulations. - I hope we come back again and again to this venue. Glenn Deen - The huge amount of open seating is amazing. Terry Manderson - Venue is great, seating is great. - The bar hours are horrible. [?] - I like that we rotate. There is one thing we should consider, having an Asia meeting by the end of the year, might be at the wrong side of the travel budget. At the end there is cut. In the beginning of the year might be easier. You could consider. Glenn Deen - We have considered that, we migth do that. - Right now we have booked out until 2021, past that date we want to do that expiriment Bob Hinden - That is a very one region view of things. It is about balancing the pain. Glenn Deen - If we do it, it will be an expiriment. - Availability of venues if the biggest consideration - In Asia we have been having a hard time finding venues in November - In March that might open new venues. Meeting ends at 19:20