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. iesg-secretary@cnri.reston.va.us. 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.