RFC4441rev status as of IETF 86 Spencer Dawkins

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
IETF Bridge WG Transition to IEEE WG Dave Harrington Dan Romascanu This presentation will probably involve audience discussion, which will create.
Advertisements

An Introduction to Writing a Syllabus By the end of this module, you will: Know reasons to write a syllabus Know the basic parts of a syllabus Have sample.
Request Management Mirror-. A random three day sample of Incidents revealed that about 86% of the registered Incidents were legitimate Requests Many other.
The Writing Process Communication Arts.
Russ Housley IETF Chair 23 July 2012 Introduction to the IETF Standards Process.
Improving your paper SUGGESTIONS FOR SUCCESS. Writing = Revising  Writing IS a process  This paper WILL take hard work to get a good grade (or even.
IETF-IEEE Relationship Status Report. Agenda Administrivia – Nose count and agenda bash – Approval of minutes from leadership meeting RFC 4441bis status.
The Writing Process.
Doc.: IEEE /0348r0 Submission March 2015 Lee Armstrong, Armstrong Consulting, Inc.Slide 1 Proposed Tiger Team actions Date: Authors:
What is a Working Group ID (and when to adopt one) Adrian Farrel Maastricht, July 2010.
SIP working group status Keith Drage, Dean Willis.
A tech spec requirements draft IETF 64 TECHSPEC BOF.
Market Meeting Support Susan Munson ERCOT Retail Market Liaison Commercial Operations Subcommittee (COPS) June 10, 2008.
Submission doc.: IEEE /0643r0May 2008 Terry L Cole (AMD)Slide 1 WG Technical Editor’s Mid-Plenary Report (May) Date: Authors:
Module 5 Week 11 Supplement 12. SPEAKING TRUTH EFFECTIVELY How to provide insightful and effective peer reviews.
Submission February 2014 Slide 1 IEEE 802 Response to FDIS comments on IEEE 802.1AR 20 March 2014 Authors: NameCompanyPhone .
Slide 1 IEEE 802 Response to FDIS comments on IEEE 802.1AS 20 March 2014 Authors: NameCompanyPhone .
Dime WG Status Update IETF#81, THURSDAY, July 28, Afternoon Session I.
DIME WG IETF 82 Dime WG Agenda & Status THURSDAY, November 17, 2011 Jouni Korhonen & Lionel Morand.
1 DHCP Authentication Discussion INTAREA meeting, 70th IETF Vancouver, Canada Jari Arkko and Ralph Droms.
29-30 September 2005IETF London, UK1 Lemonade IETF 63.5 Eric Burger Glenn Parsons
Dnssd WG Chairs: Tim Chown Ralph Droms IETF 89, London, 3 rd March 2014.
IAB Report Technical Plenary IETF 81 July 25, 2011.
SIRs, or AIRs, or something draft-carpenter-solution-sirs-01.txt Brian Carpenter without consulting my co-author Dave Crocker IETF 57, 07/03.
What makes for a quality RFC? An invited talk to the MPLS WG Adrian Farrel IETF-89 London, March 2014.
NomCom WG IETF58 Minneapolis. Agenda Agenda Review Review of changes made in draft-ietf-nomcom-2727bis-08.txt Review of proposals for closing open issues.
Disman – IETF 56 Alarm MIB Sharon Chisholm Dan Romascanu
Doc.: IEEE /197R0 Submission March 2003 Terry Cole, AMDSlide WG Technical Editor’s Report Terry Cole, AMD (WG technical editor status.
RFC 2050 Working Group Presentation by Cathy Wittbrodt Packet Design Original presentation by Mark McFadden University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee.
WG Document Status 192nd IETF TEAS Working Group.
Slide 1 IEEE 802 Response to FDIS comments on IEEE 802.1AS 18 March 2014 Authors: NameCompanyPhone .
Multiple Interfaces (MIF) WG IETF 79, Beijing, China Margaret Wasserman Hui Deng
Query Health Distributed Population Queries Implementation Group Meeting October 11, 2011.
3777 drp 1 Arbiter Report: RFC 3777 Dispute Resolution Jan Scott Bradner 12 March 2008.
The Refereeing Module of the SPMS FEL2005: August Heinz-Dieter Nuhn – Scientific Editor Beck Reitmeyer – Conference Editor Referee = Reviewer = Expert.
March 2006 CAPWAP Protocol Specification Update March 2006
1 Yet Another Mail Working Group IETF 78 July 29, 2010.
BFD IETF 83. Note Well Any submission to the IETF intended by the Contributor for publication as all or part of an IETF Internet-Draft or RFC and any.
RTP Splicing Status Update draft-ietf-avtext-splicing-for-rtp-11 Jinwei Xia.
Polling and Voting Adrian Farrel Routing Area Director Maastricht, July 2010.
Doc.: IEEE r Submission April 2007 Michael Lynch, Nortel 22 March Agenda Opening comments and attendance Schedule of meetings/deadlines.
REPORTING AND PUBLISHING RESEARCH FINDINGS Matthew L. S. Gboku DDG/Research Coordinator Sierra Leone Agricultural Research Institute Presentation at the.
Rfc4474bis-03 IETF 92 (Texas) STIR WG Jon. First principles (yet again) Separating the work into two buckets: 1) Signaling – What fields are signed, signer/verifier.
Writing the Paragraph. Before you begin; let’s consider the process Step One Prewriting: Select a topic and details. Be sure it is specific to assignment.
Design Guidelines Thursday July 26, 2007 Bernard Aboba IETF 69 Chicago, IL.
Draft-melia-mipshop-mobility-services-ps-01.txt. From IETF #66 Discuss MIH PS (as expressed by the WG chair) Need a single PS at WG level (several drafts.
Agenda Marc Blanchet and Chris Weber July 2011 IRI WG IETF 81 1.
DMM WG IETF 84 DMM WG Agenda & Status Tuesday, July 31 st, 2012 Jouni Korhonen, Julien Laganier.
Moving Forward on Working Group Snapshot IETF 59 NEWTRK Spencer Dawkins draft-dawkins-pstmt-twostage-01.txt.
1 An RFC Stream for the IRTF Wednesday, 12 March 2008 Scalable Adaptive Multicast RG.
SIP Working Group IETF 72 chaired by Keith Drage, Dean Willis.
RADEXT WG Virtual Interim Agenda Monday, October 11, :00 AM – 10:00 AM PDT Please join the Jabber room:
TSVWG IETF-89 (London) 5 th & 7 th March 2014 Gorry Fairhurst David Black James Polk WG chairs 1.
EDU BOF IESG Plenary – IETF57, Vienna Margaret Wasserman
Trust Anchor Update Requirements for DNSSEC Russ Mundy for the editors Steve Crocker, Howard Eland, Russ Mundy.
6TSCH Webex 07/05/2013. Reminder: This call is recorded the record is public Minutes are taken and published to the ML.
SIPPING Working Group IETF 67 Mary Barnes Gonzalo Camarillo.
SIP Working Group IETF Chairs -- Rohan MAHY Dean WILLIS.
TechKnowlogy Conference August 2, 2011 Using GoogleDocs for Collaboration.
WebFire Wednesday Webinars:
Liaison Report Date: Authors: January 2012
Thoughts on The Principle of “Divide and Conquer”
Coordinator Application and My Credits Module
IETF-IEEE Relationship RFC 4441 Summary
Liaison Report Date: Authors: January 2012
David Noveck IETF99 at Prague July 20, 2017
Coordinate Operations Standard
AMPC 2018 First Time member view
What makes for a quality RFC?
Liaison Report Date: Authors: January 2012
Presentation transcript:

RFC4441rev status as of IETF 86 Spencer Dawkins

Background RFC 4441 describes IEEE 802-IETF relationship... –... As of about 2004 A lot of water under the bridge since then –IEEE 802 now doing their own MIB work –Canonical list of coordination topics grown from 5 to about 20 –More coordination topics expected IEEE 802/IETF/IAB leadership meeting in July 2012 –Trained each body about the other –Reviewed a bunch of coordination topics –Agreed to revise RFC 4441 (“RFC4441rev”) Assembled drafting team from both SDOs –Trying to cross the finish line now IETF 86 March 2013IAB Liaison Oversight ProgramSlide 2

The High-order Bit The target audience for this document: –IEEE 802 and IETF participants... –... who are working or proposing new work... –... in one of these organizations... –... on topics that may overlap or conflict... –... with work in the other organization, –... who may not be familiar with the other organization, –... who need some understanding of the other organization, –... but who may never attend a meeting in the other organization The document is not binding on either IETF or IEEE 802 –It does not override existing processes in either organization This needs to be blindingly obvious to every reader IETF 86 March 2013IAB Liaison Oversight ProgramSlide 3

Where we are now IAB Last Call on draft -03 ended Friday before IETF –Helpful comments from Bernard, Dave, Adrian and Russ –Also received early feedback from IEEE Most comments are straightforward –Magic incantation to see the comments is atus=closed&status=new&status=reopened&component=draft- iab-rfc4441rev&order=priority atus=closed&status=new&status=reopened&component=draft- iab-rfc4441rev&order=priority Some aren't... –So, let’s talk! IETF 86 March 2013IAB Liaison Oversight ProgramSlide 4

Descriptive text This is the biggest issue we’re dealing with –-03 includes descriptive text about the way IETF works –This isn’t IEEE 802-specific (comparisons are, of course) There’s a real tension between –IETF comments: “point to BCPs and stop typing” –IEEE comments: “please tell us MORE” IETF concern is about casual text –Sample: "working group chairs manage working groups“ –Sure, we can do a clean-up pass, checking carefully Meta-IETF concern about possible confusion –Of ANY non-BCP text that can be misaligned with BCP text IETF 86 March 2013IAB Liaison Oversight ProgramSlide 5

Proposed solutions Drafting team still wants to say SOMETHING –Tao of IETF is general guidance for new IETF participants –Not designed for IEEE 802 people who need to liaise with IETF Major surgery –Replace generic IETF description with pointers to BCPs –Move “compare and contrast” to clearly labeled appendix IEEE 802 sections also have descriptive text –Information spread over multiple documents Minor surgery –Seriously careful review looking for what’s imprecise –Leave “compare and contrast” in the body of the text Compared to this issue, all the others are easy IETF 86 March 2013IAB Liaison Oversight ProgramSlide 6

Who is responsible for notifications? Proposal: –We have liaison relationships for most existing work –Each group initiating work will notify other SDO –Use New-work as the notification path –Neither SDO needs to monitor other’s WG mailing lists, etc. –Other SDO is responsible for identifying affected groups –Has the expertise to navigate own organization –If all else fails, anybody can talk to anybody, as a “heads-up” New-Work mailing list is only the beginning –IEEE 802/IETF coordination calls become really important IETF 86 March 2013IAB Liaison Oversight ProgramSlide 7

Mismatched levels of documentation “What's the IEEE/IETF equivalent?“ asked many times –IEEE 802 and IETF evolved separately for decades –example: IETF has web page of liaison relationships –IEEE didn’t have an equivalent page Many are easy to fix –IEEE 802 added equivalent liaison relationships page this week Many not want perfect symmetry –How long do we want to wait for more fixes? IETF 86 March 2013IAB Liaison Oversight ProgramSlide 8

Intended path forward Resolve the comments received to date –Wasn’t able to resolve them all prior to this meeting – sorry! IAB issues Call for Comment to community –May also receive additional IEEE 802-side comments –Resolve comments received during this step Is IEEE 802 planning to ballot this? –Or IEEE 802 working groups just provide comments? –Could IEEE 802 provide a note about their agreement? Publish as IAB stream RFC –Not planning to publish this in an IEEE 802 equivalent form –IEEE 802 will add to Chairs Guidelines We’re shooting to be finished by June IETF 86 March 2013IAB Liaison Oversight ProgramSlide 9

Q&A and Discussion