INTERNET ENGINEERING STEERING GROUP (IESG)
                      3 November 1994

Reported by:  John Stewart, 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 at
<[email protected]>.

ATTENDEES
---------
   Coya, Steve / CNRI
   Halpern, Joel / Newbridge Networks
   Huitema, Christian  / INRIA (IAB Liaison)
   Huizer, Erik / SURFnet
   Klensin, John / MCI
   Knowles, Stev / FTP Software
   Mankin, Allison / NRL
   Mockapetris, Paul / ISI
   O'Dell, Mike / UUNET
   Reynolds, Joyce / ISI
   Schiller, Jeff / MIT
   Stewart, John / CNRI
   Topolcic, Claudio / BBN

Regrets
-------
   Bradner, Scott / Harvard
   Rekhter, Yakov / IBM (IAB Liaison)
   Rose, Marshall / DBC



1. The IESG approved "POP3 AUTHentication command"
  <draft-myers-pop3-auth-01.txt> for the status of Proposed Standard.

2. Working Group Actions

  o The IESG approved the creation of the Quality of Information
    Services Working Group (QUIS) in the Applications Area of the
    IETF.

  o The IESG approved the creation of the HyperText Markup Language
    Working Group (HTML) in the Applications Area of the IETF.

3. Working Group Informational/Experimental Documents

  o The IESG had no objections to "NBMA Address Resolution Protocol
    (NARP)" <draft-ietf-rolc-nbma-arp-00.txt> being published as an
    Experimental RFC.  However, because of the incorrect "if it's an
    RFC it must be a standard" view that many people have and the
    truly experimental nature of this document, an IESG note, to be
    written by Joel Halpern, will be placed on the RFC stating that
    it is *not* a standard and truly is experimental.  Halpern will
    send a copy of the text to the IESG to allow for comment, and
    then the Document Action will be sent.

ACTION(Halpern): Draft the "IESG note" for the RFC and send to IESG.

  o The IESG had no objection to "Procedures for Formalizing,
    Evolving, and Maintaining the Internet X.500 Directory Schema"
    <draft-howes-x500-schema-02.txt> being published as an
    Informational RFC.

4. RFC Editor Actions

  o The IESG will ask the RFC Editor for an extension on reviewing
    "A Protocol for Asynchronous access to TCP/IP hosts on a X.25
    PSDN" for publication as an Informational RFC.  Stev Knowles
    wants time for review and discussion with the author.

  o Marshall Rose asked the IESG to wait for his review before
    replying to the RFC Editor on publishing "RMON Implementation
    Issues for Managers and Agents" being published as an
    Informational RFC.

5. Management Issues

  o Paul Mockapetris and Bob Hinden are still working on the
    details of the agreement for Sun to give RPC and XDR to the
    IETF.

  o The IESG is concerned about RFCs being published that (1) are
    products of IETF working groups but have not had IESG review
    or (2) "tread on" standards track material but were not shown
    to the IESG before publication.  The suggestion was made that
    new document names should be created to differentiate, for
    example, standards track vs. non-standards track material.

ACTION(O'Dell): Send the IESG some thoughts on creating new document
 names.
ACTION(Coya): Talk to RFC Editor about this general issue.

  o There will be a working group chair get-together on Monday
    morning in San Jose.  The IESG agreed that the meeting needs to
    have an agenda.  The suggestion was made to have a single-topic
    agenda of "is this get-together useful and should it be
    continued?".  The IESG seemed to think that was fine.  The
    invitation/announcement has been sent to the 'wgchairs' list.

  o There are two updates on the Motorola patent claims on PPPEXT's
    compression work.  (1) Motorola has said that they will make
    the technology available on 'reasonable and non-discriminatory
    terms' and that they would have the terms by the end of the
    year.  As a result, the IESG can go ahead and continue with the
    protocol action, but the documents cannot be published as RFCs
    until the written assurances have been received from Motorola to
    place in the RFC.  (2) In parallel to this, an effort is under
    way to prove prior art against Motorola's patents.  This activity
    is not being done by the IETF/IESG, though that may prove
    valuable in this case.  Steve Coya will keep the IESG updated on
    this issue.

  o Bob Hinden sent some comments to the IESG in response to the Last
    Call on the IPng recommendation.  The comments were positive with
    one exception:  he objected to the requirement of implementing
    encryption.  His objections were based on the US's export control
    policies on encryption software.  It was pointed out that there
    is a difference between including the feature of encryption and
    an actual encryption algorithm; it was also pointed out that the
    US does allow some encryption algorithms to be exportable under
    "commodities jurisdiction."

    This and other issues surrounding IPng will be discussed at the
    next teleconference.  The Last Call on the recommendation is due
    to expire 11 November.

  o The Department of Defense has been doing profiling of Internet
    protocols.  The IESG sees this as a bad thing, but it has no
    way of preventing it.  Paul Mockapetris said that he will see the
    profiles and will comment on them if necessary.

  o The logo contest has been announced.

You are viewing proxied material from infinitelyremote.com. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.