IESG agenda: 2017-10-26

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

            (Error reading /a/www/www6/iesg/internal/task.txt)
          

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-lime-yang-connectionless-oam
Proposed Standard
Generic YANG Data Model for Connectionless Operations, Administration, and Maintenance(OAM) protocols
Token
Benoit Claise (OPS area)
IANA review
IANA - Review Needed
Consensus
Yes
Reviews
Last call expires
2017-10-25

IETF stream
draft-ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam-methods
Proposed Standard
Retrieval Methods YANG Data Model for Connectionless Operations, Administration, and Maintenance(OAM) protocols
Token
Benoit Claise (OPS area)
IANA review
IANA - Review Needed
Consensus
Yes
Reviews
Last call expires
2017-10-25

IETF stream
draft-ietf-6man-maxra
Proposed Standard
Support for adjustable maximum router lifetimes per-link
Token
Terry Manderson (INT area)
IANA review
IANA OK - No Actions Needed
Consensus
Yes
Reviews

IETF stream
draft-ietf-mile-rolie
Proposed Standard
Resource-Oriented Lightweight Information Exchange
Token
Kathleen Moriarty (SEC area)
IANA review
IANA - Not OK
Consensus
Yes
Reviews

IETF stream
draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc6555bis
Proposed Standard
Happy Eyeballs Version 2: Better Connectivity Using Concurrency
Token
Warren Kumari (OPS area)
IANA review
IANA OK - No Actions Needed
Consensus
Yes
Reviews
IPR
Apple Inc.'s Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc6555bis

IETF stream
draft-ietf-uta-email-deep
Proposed Standard
Cleartext Considered Obsolete: Use of TLS for Email Submission and Access
Token
Alexey Melnikov (ART area)
IANA review
IANA - Not OK
Consensus
Yes
Reviews

IETF stream
draft-ietf-netconf-rfc6536bis
Internet Standard
Network Configuration Access Control Module
Token
Benoit Claise (OPS area)
IANA review
IANA - Review Needed
Consensus
Yes
Reviews
Last call expires
2017-10-25

2.1.2 Returning items

(None)

2.2 Individual submissions

2.2.1 New items

IETF stream
draft-wu-l3sm-rfc8049bis
Proposed Standard
YANG Data Model for L3VPN Service Delivery
Token
Benoit Claise (OPS area)
IANA review
Version Changed - Review Needed
Consensus
Yes
Reviews

2.2.2 Returning items

(None)

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-tcpinc-tcpeno
Experimental
TCP-ENO: Encryption Negotiation Option
Token
Mirja Kühlewind (TSV area)
IANA review
IANA - Review Needed
Consensus
Unknown
Reviews
Last call expires
2017-10-19

IETF stream
draft-ietf-tcpinc-tcpcrypt
Experimental
Cryptographic protection of TCP Streams (tcpcrypt)
Token
Mirja Kühlewind (TSV area)
IANA review
IANA - Review Needed
Consensus
Unknown
Reviews
Last call expires
2017-10-19

IETF stream
draft-ietf-rmcat-scream-cc
Experimental
Self-Clocked Rate Adaptation for Multimedia
Token
Mirja Kühlewind (TSV area)
IANA review
IANA OK - No Actions Needed
Consensus
Unknown
Reviews
Last call expires
2017-10-23
IPR
Microsoft Technology Licensing, LLC. 's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-rmcat-scream-cc and draft-ietf-rmcat-nada

IETF stream
draft-ietf-ippm-alt-mark
Experimental
Alternate Marking method for passive and hybrid performance monitoring
Token
Spencer Dawkins (TSV area)
IANA review
Version Changed - Review Needed
Consensus
Unknown
Reviews
IPR
Telecom Italia SpA's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-ippm-alt-mark

IETF stream
draft-ietf-i2nsf-framework
Informational
Framework for Interface to Network Security Functions
Token
Kathleen Moriarty (SEC area)
IANA review
IANA OK - No Actions Needed
Consensus
Yes
Reviews
Last call expires
2017-10-25

IETF stream
draft-ietf-bier-mpls-encapsulation
Experimental
Encapsulation for Bit Index Explicit Replication in MPLS and non-MPLS Networks
Token
Alia Atlas (RTG area)
IANA review
IANA - Not OK
Consensus
Yes
Reviews
IPR
Cisco's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-bier-mpls-encapsulation

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)

4. Working Group actions

4.1 WG creation

4.1.1 Proposed for IETF review

(None)

4.1.2 Proposed for approval

(None)

4.2 WG rechartering

4.2.1 Under evaluation for IETF review

(None)

4.2.2 Proposed for approval

(None)

5. IAB news we can use

6. Management issues

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