Subject: Tentative Agenda - Adelaide IETF

From: "Mike St. Johns" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 15:27:37 -0800

Intro and Agenda Bashing - StJohns

BPI MIB Closure - Rich Woundy
DOCSIS/Euromodem Harmonization - Rich Woundy et al
DOCSIS DHCP (?)  Tentative - Rich Woundy
Subscriber Management MIB - StJohns (for W Sawyer)
Cable Device MIB SNMPv3/IPv6 Harmonization plus multi CPE interfaces - StJohns
Other Items (QOS MIB?)

Wrapup - StJohns

(If there are other items that need to be brought up, please email them to 
me before Wed next week)

---

From: Rich Woundy <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 17:31:29 -0500

>DOCSIS DHCP (?)  Tentative - Rich Woundy

FYI. I submitted the following internet draft that I can discuss in the
working group meeting. It is definitely on the agenda in the DHC working
group.

In the DOCSIS cable environment (the original motivation for this
document), these messages are exchanged between the CMTS and the DHCP server.

-- Rich

>A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts 
>directories.
>
>
>         Title           : DHCP Lease Query
>         Author(s)       : R. Woundy, K. Kinnear
>         Filename        : draft-woundy-dhcpleasequery-00.txt
>         Pages           : 11
>         Date            : 16-Mar-00
>
>Access concentrators that act as DHCP relay agents need to determine
>the endpoint locations of IP addresses across public broadband access
>networks such as cable, DSL, and wireless networks. Because ARP
>broadcasts are undesirable in public networks, many access
>concentrator implementations 'glean' location information from DHCP
>messages forwarded by its relay agent function. Unfortunately, the
>typical access concentrator loses its gleaned information when the
>access concentrator is rebooted or is replaced. This memo proposes
>that when gleaned DHCP information is not available, the access
>concentrator/relay agent obtains the location information directly
>from the DHCP server(s) using a new, lightweight DHCPLEASEQUERY
>message.
>
>A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-woundy-dhcpleasequery-00.txt
>
>Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username
>"anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in,
>type "cd internet-drafts" and then
>         "get draft-woundy-dhcpleasequery-00.txt".
>
>A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in
>http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
>or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt
>
>
>Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail.
>
>Send a message to:
>         [email-masked].
>In the body type:
>         "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-woundy-dhcpleasequery-00.txt".
>
>NOTE:   The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in
>         MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility.  To use this
>         feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE"
>         command.  To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or
>         a MIME-compliant mail reader.  Different MIME-compliant mail readers
>         exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with
>         "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split
>         up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on
>         how to manipulate these messages.
>
>
>Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
>implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
>Internet-Draft.
>Content-Type: text/plain
>Content-ID:     <[email-masked]>
>
>ENCODING mime
>FILE /internet-drafts/draft-woundy-dhcpleasequery-00.txt
>
><ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-woundy-dhcpleasequery-00.txt>

---

From: Rich Woundy <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2000 15:02:04 -0500

>BPI MIB Closure - Rich Woundy

I believe we decided as a working group to publish the DOCSIS 1.0-oriented
BPI MIB as an Informational RFC, and to put the BPI+ MIB on the standards
track. I incorporated BPI MIB comments from the working group and published
the following internet draft:
<http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipcdn-mcns-bpi-mib-01.txt>.

After reading RFC 2026 <http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2026.txt>, it appears
that an IETF last call is required to publish the BPI MIB as Informational;
see the relevant process text below. I would like to request the working
group to submit this draft to the IESG for publication as an Informational
RFC.

Is it possible to confirm this action (either by mailing list or in person)
by the end of the ipcdn meeting in Adelaide next Tuesday? Do we need an
official working group Last-Call? Are there any remaining objections?

Note: the draft has been posted for more than the minimum two weeks.

-- Rich Woundy

4.2.3  Procedures for Experimental and Informational RFCs
   ...

   Documents proposed for Experimental and Informational RFCs by IETF
   Working Groups go through IESG review.  The review is initiated using
   the process described in section 6.1.1.

6.1.1  Initiation of Action

   A specification that is intended to enter or advance in the Internet
   standards track shall first be posted as an Internet-Draft (see
   section 2.2) unless it has not changed since publication as an RFC.
   It shall remain as an Internet-Draft for a period of time, not less
   than two weeks, that permits useful community review, after which a
   recommendation for action may be initiated.

   A standards action is initiated by a recommendation by the IETF
   Working group responsible for a specification to its Area Director,
   copied to the IETF Secretariat or, in the case of a specification not
   associated with a Working Group, a recommendation by an individual to
   the IESG.

---

From: "Mike St. Johns" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2000 16:51:48 -0800

Consider this the beginning of the working group last call for BPI.  I'll 
submit this for Informational status when we get back from Adelaide.  Let's 
talk about where BPI+ is at the meeting - I think we can probably do a wg 
last call after the meeting and place it on the standards track.

Mike