DRAFT agenda for krb-wg at IETF 63

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
9 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

DRAFT agenda for krb-wg at IETF 63

Jeffrey Hutzelman
Based on my previous call for agenda topics, plus the current work before
the group, I have developed the following draft agenda for our meeting at
IETF63.  Regular participants will note that the format differs somewhat
from our previous meetings; in this agenda, the majority of the time is
given over to "technical discussion", whihc I expect to be exactly that.

I'll be out of town for a while, and the agenda submission deadline is
next Monday.  Jeff Altman has agreed to mediate agenda-related discussion,
and to submit the final agenda before the deadline.

-- Jeff



Kerberos WG (krb-wg)

DAY, MONTH DD at HHHH-HHHH
====================================

Chair(s):
Jeffrey Hutzelman <[hidden email]>

AGENDA:

Preliminaries - Jeffrey Hutzelman (5 min)
  - Introduction
  - Blue Sheets
  - Scribe, Jabber
  - Agenda Bashing

Document Status - Jeffrey Hutzelman (5 min)
  - Clarifications (RFC4120)
  - GSSAPI (RFC4121)
  - PKINIT (draft-ietf-cat-kerberos-pk-init-27.txt)
  - OCSP (draft-ietf-krb-wg-ocsp-for-pkinit-06.txt)
  - Enctype Negotiation (draft-zhu-kerb-enctype-nego-03.txt)

Technical Discussion (90 min)
  - PKINIT Issue - Binding requests and replies (Andre Scedrov, UPenn)
  - Set/Change PW Issues (Nico Williams, Sun Microsystems (via jabber?))
  - Kerberos Extensions

Update Milestones - Chair and Participants (10 min)



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: DRAFT agenda for krb-wg at IETF 63

Larry Zhu
DRAFT agenda for krb-wg at IETF 63
please add the referral draft  into the agenda. thanks. the current version -06 contains descriptions how the nt-enterprise name is used in X.509 certificates for PKINIT. JK and I will both be present but JK will handle the presentation and/or technical discussion for this ID.
 
-- Larry

 

From: [hidden email] on behalf of Jeffrey Hutzelman
Sent: Mon 7/18/2005 6:09 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: DRAFT agenda for krb-wg at IETF 63

Based on my previous call for agenda topics, plus the current work before
the group, I have developed the following draft agenda for our meeting at
IETF63.  Regular participants will note that the format differs somewhat
from our previous meetings; in this agenda, the majority of the time is
given over to "technical discussion", whihc I expect to be exactly that.

I'll be out of town for a while, and the agenda submission deadline is
next Monday.  Jeff Altman has agreed to mediate agenda-related discussion,
and to submit the final agenda before the deadline.

-- Jeff



Kerberos WG (krb-wg)

DAY, MONTH DD at HHHH-HHHH
====================================

Chair(s):
Jeffrey Hutzelman <[hidden email]>

AGENDA:

Preliminaries - Jeffrey Hutzelman (5 min)
  - Introduction
  - Blue Sheets
  - Scribe, Jabber
  - Agenda Bashing

Document Status - Jeffrey Hutzelman (5 min)
  - Clarifications (RFC4120)
  - GSSAPI (RFC4121)
  - PKINIT (draft-ietf-cat-kerberos-pk-init-27.txt)
  - OCSP (draft-ietf-krb-wg-ocsp-for-pkinit-06.txt)
  - Enctype Negotiation (draft-zhu-kerb-enctype-nego-03.txt)

Technical Discussion (90 min)
  - PKINIT Issue - Binding requests and replies (Andre Scedrov, UPenn)
  - Set/Change PW Issues (Nico Williams, Sun Microsystems (via jabber?))
  - Kerberos Extensions

Update Milestones - Chair and Participants (10 min)



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: DRAFT agenda for krb-wg at IETF 63

Jeffrey Hutzelman
On Mon, 18 Jul 2005, Liqiang(Larry) Zhu wrote:

> please add the referral draft into the agenda. thanks. the current
> version -06 contains descriptions how the nt-enterprise name is used
> in X.509 certificates for PKINIT. JK and I will both be present but JK
> will handle the presentation and/or technical discussion for this ID.

We're trying to avoid pure presentations.
Is there an open question here?  IF so, please bring it up on the list
first, so everyone can become familiar with the issue.  If we can't
resolve the issue on the list, we can spend meeting time discussing it.


Yes, this is a departure from how we've handled previous meetings, and no,
I'm not picking on Larry or on this draft.  There has been quite a bit of
discussion on the WG chairs list lately about making effective use of
scarce face-to-face meeting time.  While we're not as bad as some groups
apparently are, we've been spending an awful lot of meeting time on
presentations of material which people could have learned by reading the
drafts before attending the meeting.  In some cases, this has gotten to
the point where we've deferred technical discussion to the mailing list in
order to have enough time to get through the presentations.  That's
backward, and I'd prefer to avoid that problem in the future...


-- Jeff



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: DRAFT agenda for krb-wg at IETF 63

Larry Zhu
In reply to this post by Jeffrey Hutzelman
I would request the working group to review -06. I do not think we have
significant open issues in -06.  

Most importantly, the milestone for WGLC on the referral ID is August
2005.

With most of issues in PKINIT closed or being closed, I would like to
bring this ID to the attention of the working group. It is time to get
it done!

-- Larry

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Jeffrey
Hutzelman
Sent: Monday, July 18, 2005 9:51 AM
To: Liqiang(Larry) Zhu
Cc: [hidden email]
Subject: RE: DRAFT agenda for krb-wg at IETF 63

On Mon, 18 Jul 2005, Liqiang(Larry) Zhu wrote:

> please add the referral draft into the agenda. thanks. the current
> version -06 contains descriptions how the nt-enterprise name is used
> in X.509 certificates for PKINIT. JK and I will both be present but JK
> will handle the presentation and/or technical discussion for this ID.

We're trying to avoid pure presentations.
Is there an open question here?  IF so, please bring it up on the list
first, so everyone can become familiar with the issue.  If we can't
resolve the issue on the list, we can spend meeting time discussing it.


Yes, this is a departure from how we've handled previous meetings, and
no,
I'm not picking on Larry or on this draft.  There has been quite a bit
of
discussion on the WG chairs list lately about making effective use of
scarce face-to-face meeting time.  While we're not as bad as some groups
apparently are, we've been spending an awful lot of meeting time on
presentations of material which people could have learned by reading the
drafts before attending the meeting.  In some cases, this has gotten to
the point where we've deferred technical discussion to the mailing list
in
order to have enough time to get through the presentations.  That's
backward, and I'd prefer to avoid that problem in the future...


-- Jeff





Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: DRAFT agenda for krb-wg at IETF 63

Jeffrey Hutzelman
In reply to this post by Jeffrey Hutzelman
Great.  Does anyone care to comment on this document?

-----Original Message-----
From: "Liqiang\(Larry\) Zhu" <[hidden email]>
Date: Monday, Jul 18, 2005 1:31 pm
Subject: RE: DRAFT agenda for krb-wg at IETF 63

I would request the working group to review -06. I do not think we have significant open issues in -06. Most importantly, the milestone for WGLC on the referral ID is August
2005.
With most of issues in PKINIT closed or being closed, I would like to bring this ID to the attention of the working group. It is time to get it done!

-- Larry

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Jeffrey
Hutzelman
Sent: Monday, July 18, 2005 9:51 AM
To: Liqiang(Larry) Zhu
Cc: [hidden email]
Subject: RE: DRAFT agenda for krb-wg at IETF 63

On Mon, 18 Jul 2005, Liqiang(Larry) Zhu wrote:

> please add the referral draft into the agenda. thanks. the current
> version -06 contains descriptions how the nt-enterprise name is used
> in X.509 certificates for PKINIT. JK and I will both be present but JK
> will handle the presentation and/or technical discussion for this ID.

We're trying to avoid pure presentations.
Is there an open question here?  IF so, please bring it up on the list first, so everyone can become familiar with the issue.  If we can't
resolve the issue on the list, we can spend meeting time discussing it.


Yes, this is a departure from how we've handled previous meetings, and no,
I'm not picking on Larry or on this draft.  There has been quite a bit of
discussion on the WG chairs list lately about making effective use of scarce face-to-face meeting time.  While we're not as bad as some groups apparently are, we've been spending an awful lot of meeting time on
presentations of material which people could have learned by reading the drafts before attending the meeting.  In some cases, this has gotten to the point where we've deferred technical discussion to the mailing list in
order to have enough time to get through the presentations.  That's
backward, and I'd prefer to avoid that problem in the future...


-- Jeff









Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: DRAFT agenda for krb-wg at IETF 63

Sam Hartman-5
In reply to this post by Jeffrey Hutzelman
Hi.  I had asked for some time to discuss some concerns I had about
extensions.  I will try and write up those concerns early next week
and definitely will have slides ready by the working group meeting if
I'm given time.



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: DRAFT agenda for krb-wg at IETF 63

Jeffrey Altman
Sam Hartman wrote:

> Hi.  I had asked for some time to discuss some concerns I had about
> extensions.  I will try and write up those concerns early next week
> and definitely will have slides ready by the working group meeting if
> I'm given time.

Sam:

There is 90 minutes allocated for technical discussion including
Extensions.   Are you seeking time beyond the 90 minutes?

Will it be possible for you to post your concerns to the list
prior to the meeting so that attendees will be able to come to
the meeting after having time to consider them?

Jeffrey Altman


smime.p7s (4K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: DRAFT agenda for krb-wg at IETF 63

Sam Hartman-5
>>>>> "Jeffrey" == Jeffrey Altman <[hidden email]> writes:

    Jeffrey> Sam Hartman wrote:
    >> Hi.  I had asked for some time to discuss some concerns I had
    >> about extensions.  I will try and write up those concerns early
    >> next week and definitely will have slides ready by the working
    >> group meeting if I'm given time.

    Jeffrey> Sam:

    Jeffrey> There is 90 minutes allocated for technical discussion
    Jeffrey> including Extensions.  Are you seeking time beyond the 90
    Jeffrey> minutes?

no.  I didn't see how much was allocated.


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: DRAFT agenda for krb-wg at IETF 63

Jeffrey Hutzelman
In reply to this post by Sam Hartman-5
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Sam Hartman wrote:

> Hi.  I had asked for some time to discuss some concerns I had about
> extensions.  I will try and write up those concerns early next week
> and definitely will have slides ready by the working group meeting if
> I'm given time.

I intended to hold that discussion under the "extensions" item already on
the agenda.  So yes, you'll have time.