Please let me know what I got wrong.
Have a great night,
Spencer
----------------------------------------------------------
Wednesday Plenary - Harald
This is the first Korean IETF we've had, and the smoothest, most
well-run, and most fun IETF since Oslo
State of the Union tonight - Administrative matters, IESG Plenary, IAB
Plenary
IESG reporting on the state of their operations at plenary tonight
About 1300 attendees (even more paid) from 32 countries - many from
Asia, about a quarter from US
- IPR documents are finished and published, XML2RFC supports the new
RFC boilerplates
- 126 RFCs approved since Minneapolis, about 100 published, doing
proactive followup on "old" documents
Summer IETF will be in San Diego, in August
Thanks to KT, Samsung, TTA, our NOC team, secretariat staff, and
multicast staff
Dae Young Kim on behalf of local hosts, giving us a photo tour
- Korean providers offering VDSL commercially for 50/75 Mb/s for
$13/month locally
- Vision includes "High-speed Portable Internet", or HPI, with 2 Mb/s
for mobile users, and IPv6 is our future
Richard Draves for Nomcom report
- Selected six positions for IESG, another six for IAB
- Thanks to everyone who volunteered, and everyone who agreed to serve
if selected
Fred Baker - IESG/IAB Transitions
- Thanks to Randy, Ned, Erik, Charlie, James, Mike for serving
Joyce Reynolds - RFC Editor Report
- New Errata page, RFC Interest mailing list (sign up at
www.rfc-editor.org)
- New copyright and IPR statements now being inserted into all RFCs
- New rule - all references should have corresponding textual
citations, also applies for IMPORTS section of MIBs
- Reports are available online
- Queue is growing substantially, and adding staff to match this as
required
Craig Barton - IANA Report
- Michelle had baby in January, says to say "hello"
- IANA keeps parameters unique for RIRs, TLD managers, IETF, and .int
registry
- November and December short months, January back in full swing, but
IANA is behind, and "important" requests are being prioritized
- Adding significant senior staff and spending time visioning and
budgeting
- Also working on a workflow system, to include a tracking system, to
be available for entire organization - hope to report by San Diego
- Adding new office in Brussels, translations, IDNs at ICANN, languare
character variants, IPv6 roots, revamping the website
Q: IANA workflow interaction with IESG? working will Bill Fenner
Q: will generic workflow requirements slow things down? not with
current plans, please follow up offline, hoping code starts to show up
next month
Q: reason for office in Brussels? well, we're a global company, so...
Allison Mankin - IESG Report
- will probably be reported by e-mail in the future
- IESG is grappling with overload and throughput
- ID Tracker is a critical tool now, being used for statistics
(developed by Allison and Bill Fenner)
- looking at publications requested vs documents approved - this is a
very good start for metrics
- documents requested since Minneapolis matched documents finished
(approved by IESG), so queue not growing, but only about 20 percent
finished in same interval as requested, usually experimental or
informational documents
- queue did not grow, but pipe is full - can use this for quantitative
goals, including measures of success for ICAR and PROTO efforts
- documents arriving not ready for publication - makes pipe more full
than it needs to be, and things don't have to be this way
- summaries going to Solutions mailing list
(solutions-request(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org)
- would like to develop latency metric
Q: glad PROTO experiments going forward, but something is missing.
we've lost our understanding of Proposed Standard - use it as
intended, maybe even ephemeral. Would like to make all this happen in
a short period of time - this is under discussion in NEWTRK, but we
think we can add cycles with early reviews, etc. we don't actually
know what the tradeoffs are yet.
Q: more approvals of non-standards track stuff than standards track
stuff? spending half your time reviewing non-IETF documents (or at
least half the documents are non-IETF documents - we need more history
to talk about this, but there are things we can do to improve things
Q: am seeing what I think is perfectionism on several fronts that
takes longer than it should for a document to get published - ICAR is
studying reviews
Q: sympathize with search for metrics (it was hard for RFC Editor,
too) - might think about time in state statistics- but states can be
ambiguous (include both AD time and WG time in a single number).
Q: Not one WG informational requested since Minneapolis were finished?
No, this is a misunderstanding
IESG Plenary/Open Mike
Q: Two questions for both IAB and IESG - individual participation and
consensus - are these still important? alternative is participation by
companies or governments, and voting... - we believe in these values
up to point, at which point the IESG makes a decision - Harald
semi-agrees that sometimes a decision is needed and the IESG makes
one, but does not agree that IESG can impose its will against a
working group - but does IESG try to get community consensus when it
makes a decision?
Q: And, is NOMCOM and effective way to select our leadership? - what
does the community think? current revisions to NOMCOM didn't touch the
model in use - sense of room on changing the model? maybe a quarter of
the room thinks it should be changed
Q: Our most successful RFC measured by references is 2119, inside and
outside IETF, used in lots of context where it might not apply. Should
there be a revision? has this come up in our process work? - No, it
has not, should it? - yes, and I'd like to hear from others - share
this concern when it's used in requirements documents, for instance -
also BCPs and requirements on future documents - have seen upper-case
keywords for operational advice, which the implementor can't control
in the real world - should we update 2119? no clear choice in the
room, with 90 percent abstains - limit 2119 to standards-track? -
intent of keywords is to ensure interoperability - can Bob and Pekka
write a draft?
Leslie Daigle - IAB Plenary Report
- Couple of major outputs - the ADVCOMM report from Minneapolis, and
the updated end-to-end document are out now
- five confirmed candidates for ISOC Board of Trustees appointments -
to be announced next time
Vern Paxson - IRTF Plenary Report
- AAAArch finishing up documents, to close soon
- ASRG has new co-chair, charter with broader charter, participating
in NIST workshop, related MARID BoF tomorrow
- CFRG vetting proposed modification to IKEv2, discussing specific
attacks
- DTNRG enhanced implementations, with related DARPA program brewing
- IMRG proposing measurement protocols
- MOBOPTS chartered since last IETF, 180 people met today
- NMRG had two-day meeting in January
- P2P forming subgroups
- SMRG considering "pull" rather than "push" models.
- HIP RG and "identifier/locator split" RG to be formed
IAB Plenary/Open Mike
- Eric video'ed in, missing Bernard
Q: Individual participation and consensus decision making? - has
something changed? - <reference to personal situation> L3VPN is
another example, not sure of other examples - WGs are supposed to run
by consensus, but some don't when a WG doesn't have a common goal -
what about other models? US legal system is adversarial, for
instance - we should bring these questions up periodically, but may
never solve them - it's rough consensus, not total consensus - L3VPN
co-chair asked for clarification. Not just one solution, so have to
allow more than one approach to go forward - disagreement with WGs
need to come up in WGs - hearing "I'm not going to do that" from
document editors, multiple times this week, is this normal? -
consensus is a thin veil over a complicated process that includes
responsibility, judgement, and leadership, and it's more complicated
than we usually acknowledge - trying to produce good technical
documents, and sometimes saying "no" is part of that - everyone's
opinion needs to be heard and understood, not agreed with -
Q: Is NomCom the way to go? - don't give up on NomCom