Page created for the IETF 88, Nov 3 - 8 2013, in Vancouver.
BMWG meets in the last slot on Friday, so there will be no time to update this entry before the Friday IESG meeting, but at least the meeting should be fresh in the ADs minds...
The DIME wg met on Thursday morning7 Nov. 22 people in the room and some folks on jabber/Meetecho. The main topic was on the Diameter Overload control mechanism. The output of the Design Team formed after IETF87 has bee presented and the resulting draft has been adopted as WG document (To be confirmed on the mailing list). The document on E2E security requirements for Diameter needs additional reviews but should push forwards soon after a SecDir pre-review. Update of the Group session management draft presented and some support is required in order to reflect WG consensus. The draft on Congestion and Filter attributes is fairly stable but further investigation is required to see if the draft will capture all the requirements for ECN. About the 4005bis document, it was agreed that the shepherd will submit a new version of the draft on behalf the author. If we stay without news from the author, the shepherd will officially take over the editor role.
The DNSOP WG met on Tuesday afternoon, November 5. The main discussion areas surrounding the various methods for DNSSEC key notifications. The two proposals are complementary, while a third one appears shortly before the meeting that threw the decision step into more discussion. There was also non-actionable items which would are edns(0) options that have some strong operational impact. There was a final discussion on the AS112 with DNAME extension, which was approved and put into document track. There was a discussion on a first pass on writing down requirements on doing a cache flush, and many spoke out against the idea, though many said writing down the requirements is the purpose of a working group. The biggest gating items are a decision on adopting the complementary documents on DNSSEC key notifications which has documents ready to move forward and no dissent in the working group against them.
The EMAN WG met on Tuesday afternoon, November 5. The working group discussed two primary areas of documents that needed to be progressed: the framework, and the MIBs. In the case of the framework, a competing proposal was presented, but no consensus was displayed at the meeting to move forward with it. The chairs called consensus on the existing framework draft, which has been in WG LC for a number of months, and extended a final WG LC for the two weeks following the meeting for any last minute/final comments before closing the document and moving it to the IESG review. The final portion of the meeting was devoted to presenting the status of the 3 MIBs the WG has been working on for some time. The status of these documents was largely unchanged, and so the chairs agreed to issue a WG LC on those 3 documents simultaneously following the LC period on the Framework document. Any changes to the Framework will be folded into the MIBs during this final LC period.
The IPFIX wg met on Thursday evening, 7 Nov. 22 people present plus a few on jabber. MIB Variable Export is the only remaining draft in the wg's charter. Pau Aitken should have a new version done before Christmas, we plan to run its WGLC early next year. We discussed the various existing IPFIX-related drafts; some only need Information Elements, they can be handled by the IE Doctors. Some will be AD-sponsored. Others need more work - if and when that happens the authors may bring them to the OpsArea wg. The chairs propose to close the IPFIX wg when the current drafts have been published as RFCs.
LMAP met on Wednesday for 2.5 hours. There is good progress in the work on the use cases and framework documents. Based on comments received in the meeting and on the mail list the documents will be revised until the end of Novermber, and Last Called immediatly after. The Information Model document seems to be quite in good shape, and there was consensus in the room (with one objection) to make of it a WG document. This decision will be confirmed on the list. A presentation on the new version of the HTTP-based protocol was made - this is informational at this point in time as the WG did not start discussing about protocols.
NETCONF Over TLS update - RFC 5539bis:
We went through last changes and issues. The discussion on new port has been taken again. Opinion poll of the WG showed that many people were in favor of a new port and nobody against. The WG also decided to separate the YANG module in a new document, align with the Reverse SSH module and use it for both WG items. Reverse Secure Shell (Reverse SSH): Text on ZeroConfig has been put into ZeroTouch draft with some extensions. There is an IPR on this draft. The chairs and the author informed the WG on the details.
Zero Touch Provisioning for NETCONF Call Home:
The WG has still interest in the document to develop. There was not much comments on the maillist. Discussion on whether we need different solutions in one draft or the WG should select one. Also discussed whether the draft should be merged with DHCPv6 option draft. The discussion has been taken to the maillist. NETCONF DHCPv6 Option:
Providing a bootstrapping option the draft has been supported. 10 hands in favor and 1 hand against. The authors will discuss with the ZeroTouch author whether the two drafts can be merged.
About 60 people attended the NETMOD meeting. The chartered documents
and the associated actions items are listed below:
The remaining meeting time was used to look at some of the proposed
new work. The meeting went short of time and further discussions of
proposed new work and whether the WG should recharter or close down
once all chartered documents have been delivered will take place on
the mailing list.
The OPSEC WG met on Wednesday afternoon, November 6. The working group discussed three documents. No drama was experienced during the 1h session. Draft_1 (draft-ietf-opsec-lla-only-04) managed to get 5 reviewers identified to comment in 2 weeks. Draft_2 (draft-ietf-opsec-ipv6-nd-security-00) overview was provided. A new version will be posted, and 3 reviewers identified to provide feedback. Draft_3 (draft-ietf-v6ops-balanced-ipv6-security-00) overview was presented as FYI to drive feedback generation because in v6OPS the document went in WGLC last Monday.
The radext wg met on Monday November 4 and had approximately 20 people attending and 3 on jabber. No new RFCs have been published since IETF 87. Five drafts were discussed during the 1.5hr meeting. A sixth draft (radext-dynamic-discovery) was scheduled to be discussed, but remote presenter did not log in during meeting slot. Of the five drafts discussed, four (radext-dtls, radext-ieee802, radext-nai, radext-radius-fragmentation) are wg drafts and all progressed with new versions submitted since IETF87. radext-dtls completed pre-review with sec-dir and ops-dir, which proved useful to improve state of document (we expect to continue practice in future), and is ready for doc shepherding. radext-nai closed out all open issues with latest version and is ready for wglc. radext-ieee802 closed out two issues with latest version and has one issue open pending acceptance of resolution by submitter. radext-radius-fragmentation made its first showing as wg draft following successful acceptance of individual draft. Some minor issues will drive a new version and it is expected that version will be ready for working group last call. The last draft (hartman-radext-bigger-packets) was an individual submission describing an alternate technique to pass more than 4k in data over RADIUS. Several issues exist for which a new version is planned to be published.
Andy Bierman went through the last changes, the RESTCONF protocol summary and applicability. The chair explained why it is proposed to develop in Netconf WG. The authors do not want to create a protocol which competes with Netconf. And it is seen as beneficial if Netconf and Restconf are developed in parallel and aligned with each other. There are obviously different projects outside of IETF (e.g. OpenDaylight) which use or plan to use Restconf. The opinion poll showed that there is a huge interest in this draft and nobody against. As a result of the discussion with the AD the WG chairs will prepare a charter update and adopt Restconf as the new WG item. After seeing that 6tisch WG discusses to transport YANG modules with CoAP, Netconf chair proposed a discussion on Restconf. The 6tisch, 6lo, Netconf chairs and the Restconf coauthors will meet on Thursday to discuss the use of Restconf in these WGs.
NETCONF Efficiency Extensions: The draft proposes different extensions to Netconf, which have been partly discussed already earlier.
Approx. 15 hands in favor nobody against. There is more discussion necessary on the maillist. The WG participants are requested to provide comments on the extensions and highlight the importance for each of them.
Jan Medwed presented on the OpenDaylight project status and how they use Netconf/Restconf and YANG. The presentation also highlighted which extensions the project would like to propose Netconf and YANG. OpenDaylight has a Restconf implementation and is interested to use such a RESTful solution.
The wpkops working group met. The work is a couple of months behind schedule. Delivery dates will have to be slipped. But, it is hoped to maintain the end date. There were presentations on each of the drafts identified in the charter. There was active discussion and useful guidance to the authors on how to proceed. Offers of assistance from browser/OS suppliers Microsoft and Mozilla were gratefully received.
The content of this page was last updated on 2013-11-12. It was migrated from the old Trac wiki on 2022-12-19.