Subject: [Ietf-krb-wg] IETf80 Agenda

From: Jeffrey Hutzelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 00:54:46 -0400

I have just uploaded a draft agenda for our meeting at IETF80:

http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/80/agenda/krb-wg.txt

The list of discussion topics is still somewhat preliminary; as I look
at our current work I find very little that is not either past WGLC or
otherwise stalled, and thus not much to talk about.

However, a number of work items have recently been proposed for our new
charter, and a number of these have already resulted in discussion
and/or actual documents.  I'll be happy to entertain requests for agenda
time for any of these for which the authors feel WG input would be
useful.

-- Jeff

_______________________________________________
ietf-krb-wg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://lists.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ietf-krb-wg

---

From: Sam Hartman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 07:07:57 -0400

This is consistent with the  agenda proposed, but I'd like to have time
during technical discussion for referrals.

The preview has been posted and because of my error, the draft didn't go
in Monday.  I'll post a version as soon as the repository opens again.

I'm concerned we haven't seen discussion ot the list.
Should I prepare a presentation to go over the changes to hopefully
spark discussion in the room?
_______________________________________________
ietf-krb-wg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://lists.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ietf-krb-wg

---

From: Shoichi Sakane <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2011 09:52:43 +0900

Jeff,

> Document Status - Chairs (5 min)

Will you mention about the Kerberos options for DHCPv6
in this short slot ? In my understanding, this document
is almost ready to go to the dhc working group.
I would like to hear your suggestion at the meeting, please.

Regards,

Shoichi

---

From: Jeffrey Hutzelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2011 17:42:27 -0400

> I would like to hear your suggestion at the meeting, please.

It doesn't go to DHC; it is a work item of this WG, though we copied the
DHC list on the last call and there was input from that community which
was taken into account.

The actual status is that I'm supposed to finish up a writeup of this
and send it on.  Unfortunately, the last time you asked about this (a
couple of weeks ago), I ignored this because for some reason I thought
this was one of Larry's documents rather than one of mine.  Now that
I've noticed my mistake, I'll try to take a look at this sometime next
week.

In general, the "Document Status" segment will include updates on any
documents which have had significant state changes since the last
meeting, as well as those which are in the hands of the chairs.  It is
definitely a reasonable time to bug us when we're not being responsive
about moving something forward.

-- Jeff

---

From: Shoichi Sakane <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 11:42:52 +0900

Jeff,

> I've noticed my mistake, I'll try to take a look at this sometime next

Thank you very much.

I have a trivial comment about the charter draft.

> * Complete existing work, including:
>    - DHCP Option               (draft-sakane-dhc-dhcpv6-kdc-option-09.txt)

The latest revision of the draft is 10, including minor fixes responded
to your comments, which I submitted by your request in the Beijing meeting.

It's been in the repository:

   https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sakane-dhc-dhcpv6-kdc-option/

Shoichi

---

From: Jeffrey Hutzelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 01:36:42 -0400

> spark discussion in the room?

Sorry I haven't responded sooner; I've been buried in work preparing for
a service upgrade that will happen while I'm away at IETF.

I would very much like to see us spend some meeting time on this topic,
if it will help move the document along.

I haven't seen much in the way of other comments on the agenda or
requests for items.  If there's ongoing work people want to talk about,
now would be a good time to mention it.

-- Jeff

---

From: Jeffrey Hutzelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 03:06:23 -0400

> to your comments, which I submitted by your request in the Beijing meeting.

Fixed; thanks.