[Ietf-not43] Minutes of the IETF58-MN CRISP WG meeting
George Michaelson
ggm at apnic.net
Tue Dec 2 18:51:50 EST 2003
Here are the minutes of the CRISP WG meeting from IETF-58 Minneapolis. Thanks to
Cathy Murphy for scribing, and April Marine for editing.
Please send any changes/issues to the list. I'll forward to the ietf secretariat
in a week.
cheers
-George
---------------------------
Cross Registry Information Service Protocol WG (crisp)
Wednesday, November 12 at 1300-1500
CHAIRS: April Marine <april.marine at nominum.com>
George Michaelson <ggm at apnic.net>
Scribe: Cathy Murphy
[These notes are a summary done by April and George based on Cathy's
excellent detailed notes. The detailed notes were sent to the list.
Comments like this one that are added to summarize or clarify are in
square brackets so their origin is clear.]
Name Abbreviations:
AM April Marine
AN Andy Newton
CA Chris Ambler
CM Cathy Murphy
EL Ed Lewis
FN Frederico Neves
GGM George Michaelson
GL Ginny Listman
JK John Klenson
LD Leslie Daigle
MK Mark Kosters
MS Michael S... (Could not find him after the meeting to get
his name)
RS Richard Shockey
TH Ted Hardie
WM Bill Manning
+-----+
o Welcome and Agenda Bashing - chairs
AM:
- Welcome new co-chair, George Michaelson
- Ted Hardie (now sheparding AD) was wearing too many hats
- Scribe is Cathy Murphy
- Anyone to do jabber log? Ted volunteers.
- Mail list (currently at ietf-not43 at verisignlabs.com) will be
moving to IETF servers
- No agenda changes
Since last meeting, group came to consensus on IRIS as way forward.
Reqts draft in RFC editor queue; some recent comments, but done and
not re-opening.
+-----+
o Outstanding IRIS Issues - Andy Newton
AN: These are not the issues sent to mailing list; these have come
forward since then. List items can be found in mail archives.
AM: What's the next step?
AN: Send to list and see who comments.
AM: Andy has asked for a co-author for the IRIS documents (for XML)?
... no volunteers...
[Note from April: Later Marcos Sanz agreed to co-edit]
+-----+
o Additional Requirements? - Ginny Listman
re: draft-ietf-crisp-internet-resource-number-requirements-00.txt
AM: Are you still willing to be point person for this document?
GL: Shane Kerr has agreed to be the editor going forward.
[Discussion of best way to move these requirements forward given that
we already have a draft req doc in RFC Editor queue. Decision is to
do a "bis" or update of the original req doc, one that totally
replaces the first req doc so as to capture all the requirements in
one place.]
+-----+
o IRIS lightweight transport - Andy Newton
AN: Recently, some discussion about transports on the list.
It was brought up before a while back, but is was probably premature
to discuss at that time. Now seems like a good time to discuss this.
[Presentaiton and discussion of the possibility of adding UDP as one
of the IRIS transports.]
GGM: Feel strongly that if it going to proceed, should be done here.
TH: Agree. What is going to get people to move? Will IRIS-light get
people to move? But if what is defined is so similar to whois-like,
then worry that will discourage moving.
AN: Agree with that concern, that if we proceed to UDP, won't ever
get to BEEP. But all the other drivers (int'lzation, etc) still will
require BEEP.
RS: Is any one clamoring for this?
AC: Yes, registrars are.
AM: Would like to take it to the list. [as to whether there is enough
demand to see if WG would add it as a work item]
+-----+
o Update Charter and Milestones
Is there agreement on the change to the charter language that
allows number resources to be included?
...Sense of the room was YES...
Revised Milestones proposed
[will send revised charter and milestons to the list--some small changes
in milestones from previous msg to the list]
+-----+
o Using dreg for registrar-registrar - Chris Ambler
communication
CA: Several of aspects of IRIS are to limit queuing due to mining.
This works to the detriment of registrars. What we need is a very
light-weight registar-to-registrar query mechanism. So, looking to
implement in a number of ways. One idea was to just add a flag
in port 43 so that would send back XML . Do we want to proceed with
full blown CRISP? Probably, but am approaching now just to do as a
light-weight implementation.
[This was an FYI to the group; some discussion and feedback for Chris.]
More information about the Ietf-not43
mailing list