IETF STEERING GROUP (IESG)
REPORT FROM THE IETF MEETING
February 8th, 1993
Reported by: Greg Vaudreuil, IESG Secretary
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.
[email protected].
ATTENDEES
---------
Borman, David / Cray Research
Crocker, Dave / TBO
Crocker, Steve / TIS
Coya, Steve / CNRI
Davin, Chuck / Bellcore
Gross, Philip / ANS
Hinden, Robert / SUN
Hobby, Russ / UC-DAVIS
Huizer, Erik / SURFnet
Knowles, Stev / FTP Software
Reynolds, Joyce / ISI
Piscitello, Dave/ Bellcore
Stockman, Bernard / SUNET/NORDUnet
Vaudreuil, Greg / CNRI
Regrets
Almquist, Philip / Consultant
Chapin, Lyman / BBN
1) Administrivia
o Role Call
o Bash the Agenda
o Approval of the Minutes
- January 25th
- February 1st
2) Protocol Actions
o Token Ring to Historic
o Token Bus to Historic
o Directed ARP to Experimental
o NFS to Historic
o RPC to Historic
o IP Address Guidelines to Proposed Standard
o Lightweight Directory Access Protocol to Proposed Standard
String Representation of Attribute Syntax
o Network Time Protocol
3) Technical Management Issues
o FTP (Secure) Working Group formation
o ROAD Status Check
o BOF Policy
o SNMP Security
o RIP Applicability Statement
o Wide Area Routing with RIP
5) Working Group Actions
o IP Security (ipsec)
o Integrated Directory Services (ids)
o Training Materials
MINUTES
-------
1) Administrivia
o Minutes
The minutes of the January 25th meeting were approved.
o Personnel Announcement
Chuck Davin announced that he will be unable to continue to serve
as the Area Director for Network Management. He felt that given the
timing with the selection committee currently meeting to fill open
slots that this would be the best time to step down.
IESG members expressed their regret that Chuck would not be
continuing with his fine service to the community as a member of the
IESG.
o Next Meeting
The next IESG teleconference was scheduled for February 22nd, 11:30 ET.
2) Protocol Actions
o Token Ring
A Last Call to move the Token Ring MIB to Historic was sent to the
IETF list. A number of responses was received indicating widespread
implementation and production use.
ACTION: Vaudreuil -- Send a new last call to elevate the Token Ring MIB to
Draft Standard.
o Token Bus
There was no objection to the last call moving this MIB to
Historic.
o Directed ARP
The IPLPDN Working Group was queried about the support within the
Working Group for this proposal. The Working Group felt this was
a specific deliverable, and is in fact one of the few listed in the
Goals and Milestones.
ACTION: Piscitello -- Work with George Clapp and update the IPLPDN
Working Group charter to reflect the current specific work items.
o NFS/ RPC
There was no additional information to report.
o Network Time Protocol
The IESG reviewed the Network Time Protocol Version 3 and approved
it for Draft Standard. It has taken the IESG time to resolve the
numerous issues with this protocol, including the postscript-primary
nature, determining the degree to which this is a new protocol
beyond Version 2, and difficulty in ascertaining the community
interest and requirement for this protocol without a Working
Group. With an external review coordinated by Russ Hobby, the IESG was
satisfied that the requirements for Draft Standard were met.
ACTION: Vaudreuil -- Announce the IESG acceptance of the Network Time
Protocol as a Draft Standard.
The standards process for evolution of full standard protocols is
not entirely clear. Many protocols can be extended by the
definition of new options, which themselves go through the standards
process without effecting the base protocol. Extensions are
incremental, backward interoperable changes to the base protocol,
possibly with negotiation, and some extensions require incompatible
changes that are not directly interworkable requiring support of
multiple versions. A discussion on what changes (if any) to the
process may be needed was scheduled for a future meeting.
ACTION: Vaudreuil -- Schedule a discussion about the process for the
evolution of an Internet Standard protocol.
o Lightweight Directory Access Protocol and
String Representation of Standard Attribute Syntax
With Erik Huizer, the IESG determined that it was reasonable to
consider these two documents to be a single standard. It was
understood that the String Representation may be useful in
additional contexts beyond use for the Lightweight Directory Access
protocol and should remain a separate document.
ACTION: Vaudreuil -- Announce the IESG acceptance of the Lightweight
Directory Access Protocol and the String Representation of Standard
Attribute Syntax as a Proposed Standard.
3) Technical Management Issues
o BOF Policy
The IESG completed a BOF policy on the mailing list prior to the
meeting. This policy was approved and will be announced to the
IETF-announce list and in the Internet Monthly Report.
ACTION: SCoya -- Announce the BOF Policy to the IETF-Announce mailing
list.
o Secure FTP
Steve Crocker was not present for this discussion. The IESG accepts
the necessity for a Working Group chartered narrowly to provide
extensions to FTP for security. While there exists some need for
general extensions, the IESG was not prepared to undertake a re-work
of FTP at this time.
ACTION: SCrocker (In absentia) -- Form Secure FTP Working Group.
o ROAD Status
The IESG had earlier discussed a February 15th milestone for the
posting of test implementations of the Various New-IP protocols.
With the responses from the IETF that an arbitrary decision is not
warranted, the status of the specific milestones is in doubt. It
still appears reasonable to set milestones and then offering
feedback based on them.
ACTION: Knowles -- Review the responses to the IESG and send a summary
to the IESG with a draft next step statement for the IESG.
o SNMP Security
Steve Crocker has consulted with Marshall Rose, Chuck Davin, and Jim
Galvin in an effort to identify the specific issues. The technical
issues are quite muddled and it appears that the process is
being driven hard to reach closure, possibly without considering all
issues. What is clear is that SNMP Security is intended to be a
central feature of SNMP Version 2. The possibility of continued
existence of SNMP Security for SNMP Version 1 appears to have caused
proposals for the revised SNMP Security specification to be bound to
SNMP Version 2 in such a way as to prevent independent evolution. The
resulting changes may have an impact in the ability of SNMP Version
2 to scale.
It was again noted and acknowledged by the Security Area Director
that the SNMP Security Working Group has not scheduled a meeting for
the Columbus IETF meeting.
4) RFC Editor actions
The RFC Editor received the position from the IESG that all
standards track protocols should include a statement of patent
considerations. The SMTP Extensions documents do not have this
section. The IESG agreed that the patent considerations section is
still useful but enforcement of this requirement does not make sense
until after the revision of RFC 1310 outlines the specific
requirements for disclosure.
ACTION: Vaudreuil -- Notify Postel that the inclusion of the patent
considerations section will not be required until after the publication
of the revision to RFC 1310.
Appendix -- Summary of Actions Taken
ACTION: Vaudreuil -- Send a new last call for the Token Ring MIB to
Draft Standard.
ACTION: Piscitello -- Work with George Clapp and update the IPLPDN
Working Group charter to reflect the current specific work items.
ACTION: Vaudreuil -- Announce the IESG acceptance of the Network Time
Protocol as a Draft Standard.
ACTION: Vaudreuil -- Schedule a discussion about the process for the
evolution of an Internet Standard protocol.
ACTION: Vaudreuil -- Announce the IESG acceptance of the Lightweight
Directory Access Protocol and the String Representation of Standard
Attribute Syntax as a Proposed Standard.
ACTION: SCoya -- Announce the BOF Policy to the IETF-Announce mailing
list.
ACTION: Knowles -- Review the responses to the IESG and send a summary
to the IESG with a draft next step statement for the IESG.
ACTION: Vaudreuil -- Notify Postel that the inclusion of the patent
considerations section will not be required until after the publication
of the revision to RFC 1310.
