Subject: [Isms] draft meeting agenda for Dallas

From: Juergen Quittek <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 13:07:39 +0100

Dear all,

Below please find the draft agenda for our session in Dallas.
Please send a message to the chairs if you have suggestions
for changes.

Since we might have remote participants, it would be great
if the presenters sent me their slides in advance of the session
for uploading them.

See you at the session,

    Juergen
-- 
Juergen Quittek        [email-masked]       Tel: +49 6221 90511-15
NEC Europe Ltd.,       Network Laboratories        Fax: +49 6221 90511-55
Kurfuersten-Anlage 36, 69115 Heidelberg, Germany   http://www.netlab.nec.de

============================================
Integrated Security Model for SNMP WG (isms)

Wednesday, March 22 at 0900-1130
================================

CHAIRS: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
        Juergen Quittek       <[email-masked]>

AGENDA:

  1) WG Status, Agenda bashing                     ( 5 min)

  2) Discussion of TMSM open issues                (40 min)
     - draft-ietf-isms-tmsm-01.txt

  3) Discussion of SSH model open issues           (60 min)
     - draft-ietf-isms-secshell-02.txt

  4) Wrap up                                       ( 5 min)
     - review of action points

INTERNET DRAFTS:

- Secure Shell Security Model for SNMP
  <draft-ietf-isms-secshell-02.txt>

- Transport Mapping Security Model (TMSM) for the Simple Network
  Management Protocol
  <draft-ietf-isms-tmsm-00.txt>

RELATED DRAFTS:

- RADIUS NAS-Management Authorization
  <draft-nelson-radius-management-authorization-02.txt>

_______________________________________________
Isms mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isms

---

From: "David B Harrington" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 12:08:04 -0500

Hi Juergen,

Should the agenda include a presentation reviewing the interim
meeting, the proposed decisions, and the action items?

Will the discussion be oriented toward the list of open issues from
the wiki? If so, they should be summarized with the mailing list input
so far. You should probably give the URL for the wiki in the agenda.

Will the discussion be oriented toward the list of open issues from
the [todo] and [discuss] markers in the documents? If so, they should
be summarized with the mailing list input so far. This [todo] and
[discuss] approach did not seem very effective at IETF64, because
there are so many large issues we have not resolved.

One action item from the interim was to arrange an editing meeting at
IETF65. Do you intend to do so? What specific goals do you hope to
achieve at such an editing meeting? My calendar is filling up; if we
are going to have an editing meeting, let's get the date and time
nailed down, please. Sunday may not be a good choice because people
may not be plannign to arrive early enough. I know some of the SNMP
experts have chosen to not attend IETF65, and others are planning to
leave early in the week. That's going to really limit the options.

The editing meeting at IETF64 went down a specific tangent/rathole
(notifications and callback) and we never reached any clear decisions
or did any editing. The interim became an education meeting, and it
failed to achieve clear decisions for forward progress or provide any
specific text for the documents. If we are going to have another
editing meeting, can we do some actual editing of the documents? Let's
address the ratholes on the mailing list and during the formal
session, and avoid lots of review of documents people should have
already read.

David Harrington
Standards Manager, IP OAM and Security
FutureWei Technologies, a Huawei company
[email-masked]
[email-masked]
[email-masked]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Juergen Quittek [mailto:[email-masked]] 
> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 7:08 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: [Isms] draft meeting agenda for Dallas
> 
> Dear all,
>

---

From: Juergen Quittek <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 10:44:30 +0100

Hi Dave,

> meeting, the proposed decisions, and the action items?

Would this contain more information than the minutes?
I think the minutes cover the results of the interim meeting well.

> so far. You should probably give the URL for the wiki in the agenda.

Yes, I will see if updates are still possible.

> there are so many large issues we have not resolved.

We should focus on a few essential ones that are well suited to be
solved at a regular WG session.

> leave early in the week. That's going to really limit the options.

Unfortunately, I missed the welcome reception (stuck in the flood) for
exploring availability of people during the week.  It would be
beneficial to have such a meeting.  Let's see if we can still arrange it.

> session, and avoid lots of review of documents people should have

Agreed.