Minutes of the IESG Teleconferences

    INTERNET ENGINEERING STEERING GROUP (IESG)
    March 9, 1995

    Reported by: Steve Coya, IETF Executive Director

    This report contains IESG meeting notes, positions and action items.

    These minutes were compiled by the IETF Secretariat which is supported
    by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. NCR 8820945.

    For more information please contact the IESG Secretary at
    <iesg-secretary@ietf.cnri.reston.va.us>.

    ATTENDEES
    ---------

    Bradner, Scott / Harvard
    Coya, Steve / CNRI
    Huizer, Erik / SURFnet
    Klensin, John / MCI
    Knowles, Stev / FTP Software
    Mockapetris, Paul / ISI
    O'Dell, Mike / UUNET
    Reynolds, Joyce / ISI
    Rekhter, Yakov / IBM (IAB Liaison)
    Schiller, Jeff / MIT
    Topolcic, Claudio / BBN

    Regrets
    -------
    Halpern, Joel / Newbridge Networks
    Huitema, Christian / INRIA (IAB Liaison)
    Mankin, Allison / ISI
    Rose, Marshall / DBC

    Minutes
    -------
    1. The minutes from the February 23 IESG Teleconference were
    approved. Coya to place in the Shadow directories.

    2. Paul told the IESG he planned to personally respond to the various
    messages on the IETF list pertaining to the Sun agreement. As
    requested, he will send a draft to the IESG list for
    review/comment/sign-on. The message will be sent to the IETF list
    on Tuesday, March 14.

    3. The IESG approved the following documents for Draft Standard:

    o Lightweight Directory Access Protocol
    <draft-ietf-asid-lightdirect-00.txt>
    o The String Representation of Standard Attribute Syntaxes
    <draft-ietf-asid-syntaxes-00.txt>
    o A String Representation of Distinguished Names
    <draft-ietf-asid-dist-names-00.txt>

    4. The IESG approved Using the OSI Directory to achieve User Friendly
    Naming <draft-ietf-asid-user-friendly-dir-00.txt> as a Proposed
    Standard.

    5. The IESG approved Definitions of Managed Objects for the Fourth
    Version of the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP-4) using SMIv2
    <RFC 1657> as a Draft Standard.

    6. Following some discussion, the IESG had no problems with the draft
    RFC relating to IPv6 Address Space management. A suggestion made to
    allocate IPv6 addresses with IPv4 address allocations, though there
    was concern with providing two sets of addresses, especially to
    those not experienced with internet configurations. It was pointed
    out that the draft RFC focused on the IANA managing the address
    space, not with the methods with which the address space would be
    managed.

    It was decided that the document should first be made available as
    an Internet-Draft, and then a Last Call would be issued for this
    document to be published as an Informational RFC.

    7. The IESG discussed the problem of WG expectations with respect to
    the Motorola situation, specifically referring to a message
    claiming that the IESG was taking too long to resolve when, in
    fact, the IESG was not involved in the effort. Following
    digressions on the state of RFC1602 the fact that the IESG is not
    supposed to get in the middle of patent claims, Steve Coya said he
    was planning to send a message to the PPPEXT WG to update them on
    the status of the Motorola letter.

    Coya to send draft message to Fred Baker, Stev Knowles, and Claudio
    Topolcic for review and comment prior to sending the note to the
    PPPEXT WG list.

    8. The IESG then discussed a similar situation with the DNS Security
    WG, some members of which are discussing licensing agreements with
    RSA so that the solutions proposed by the WG can be implemented.
    Paul noted that some of the difficulties being experienced were
    similar to the Motorola situation.

    9. On behalf of the IESG, Paul asked Scott, as the ISOC Liaison to the
    IESG, to convey to the ISOC that the IESG would like lawyerly
    advice both for the Poised95 effort and to look at IPR matters from
    an IESG/IETF perspective.

    10. In response to a query from the RFC-Editor, the IESG discussed
    publication of the Simple Network Time Protocol document. There was
    some interest initially in bringing the work into the IETF with the
    hopes of it becoming a standards track item. The author wants the
    document published as an informational RFC. The IESG had no problem
    with this being done.

    Coya to send note to RFC-Editor conveying this sense of the IESG.

    11. The IESG then turned its attention to the Network Time Protocol V3
    that is currently a Draft Standard, but available only in
    Postscript. The sense of the IESG was that the RFC Editor should be
    encouraged to enhance the policy of RFC publication to accommodate
    non-ASCII text. The IESG felt that this should be discussed with
    the IAB.

    12. The IESG discussed the way working groups submit documents for IESG
    consideration, noting that some assume that announcements in
    meeting minutes is sufficient notice for the AD to act upon. There
    are also cases when items are submitted but may fall between
    cracks. The IESG felt that the WG chairs needed to be reminded of
    official policy (per RFC 1603):

    The WG Chair sends email to the relevant Area Director, with
    a copy to the IESG Secretary. The mail should contain the
    reference to the document, and the request that it be
    progressed as an Informational, Experimental, Prototype or
    standards-track (Proposed, Draft or Internet Standard) RFC.

    As an added task, the IESG Secretary du jours will be responsible
    for tracking the status of that document, and noting when any
    document is waiting for AD action.

    Coya to send a note to the WG-Chairs list reminding them of this
    policy.