Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) September 23 , 1993 Reported by: Steve Coya, Acting 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. iesg-secretary@cnri.reston.va.us. ATTENDEES --------- Bradner, Scott / Harvard Chapin, Lyman / BBN Coya, Steve / CNRI Crocker, Dave / SGI Crocker, Steve / TIS Hinden, Robert / SUN Huizer, Erik / SURFnet Knowles, Stev / FTP Software Mankin, Allison / NRL Piscitello, Dave / Bellcore Reynolds, Joyce / ISI Rose, Marshall / DBC IAB Liaison Christian Huitema / INRIA Yakov Rekhter / IBM Regrets Gross, Phill / ANS Klensin, John / UNU 1. Some minor corrections were made to the July 29 minutes. It was noted that, while reduced, there were still a few "he said-she said" type phrases which need to be removed from the minutes of 29 July, 12 August, 19 August, and 2 September. ACTION: Coya to edit and resend the above mentioned minutes. There will be a 1 week timeout period after which the minutes will be considered approved in the absense of any requests for changes. 2. There is a consensus that RFC1237 (Guidelines for OSI NSAP Allocation in the Internet) should advance in grade to DRAFT. Further, there is an interest on the part of RARE/CLNS to amend text to see that European practices are described adequately. Marcel Wiget and Ross Callon are working on revised text, which should be available for last call by end of September 3. The Generic Internet Service Description (gisd) was approved as a WG in the Operational Requirements Area. ACTION: Coya to send note to chairs with this information, and a message from their Area Director that if they want to meet during the Houston IETF, they should submit their request immediately. 4. The Internet Draft "Assignment of System Identifiers for TUBA/CLNP Hosts" was approved for publication as an Informational RFC. 5. Allison Mankin and Scott Bradner provided an update on the IPNG Directorate. They are planning to choose and announce the members of the directorate to the IETF within a week or so. There will be no IAB or IESG members on the directorate. There will also be an IPNG report to the IETF at the Houston IETF meeting, but they are hoping to report to the IETF prior to the November meeting. A draft of the message will be circulated among the IESG members. They also reported that Frank Solensky will be the chair of a new IPNG Working Group: Address Lifetime Estimates (ale). 6. Stev Knowles reported that the ST-II charter is being revised and will be resubmitted to the IESG. There was some discussion on the competing efforts of ST-II and RSVP. It was noted that RSVP has not produced an Internet-Draft. ACTION: Allison to inquire as to the possibility of getting the RSVP document(s) released as Internet-Drafts. 7. The message from Peter Ford asking for the IESG to decide if the TUBA WG was not acting in the IETF manner was discussed. The IESG noted that to date there have been no process complaints, and without a complaint there can be no investigation. If anyone feels they have a basis for such a complaint, they should contact the IESG in the appropriate manner ACTION: Coya to draft a response to that effect for IESG review. The message should be from the IESG Secretary, sent on behalf of the IESG. 8. Joyce Reynolds provided a history of the Hyper Text Markup Language specification issue. Basically, the authors believe it should be entered into the standards track, while the IIIR Working Group felt it more appropriate to be published as an Informational RFC. This item will be removed from the IESG management issues section of the agenda. 9. Steve Crocker initiated a discussion on the state of the IETF Handbook and what it should include. Basically, a document describing the IETF process (a la how a bill becomes law), and one which describes the roles and functions of the IETF working groups. Steve will review the wg guidelines I-D and provide comments. Erik and Dave Crocker reported that additional comments have been received since the Amsterdam IETF, some of which will be added to the I-D. 10. The IESG reviewed a proposal for how to handle documents from the IPng candidates, a follow on IESG policy statement. The proposal was: 1. All IPng related i-d's go to experimental as they are ready 2. At some point, one IPng shall be selected, and it will be moved to the STD track as per RFC1310 3. Other IPng's may eventually be moved to historical, or may seek elective or recommened status for all or parts of the proposals, depending on the recommendation of the WGs. If recommended status is desired, a clear AS must differentiate between the uses that the technology selected as IPng is designed for and the uses that the other technology is for. After some discussion on the use of Experimental versus Prototype, the IESG adopted the above position. ACTION: Coya to draft policy statement for review. To be sent by the IESG Secretary on behalf of the IESG Chair. 11. Via an exchange of email messages, Dave Crocker reported that the dns WG reviewed the "Service Advertisement using the DNS" RFC submission and conveyed that review to the RFC Editor. While interesting, the reviewers felt it needed more, especially text as to why the authors think this is better than other mechanisms in this area (e.g. TCPMUX).