Subject: [Isms] isms meeting at the stockholm ietf

From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2009 10:11:02 +0200

Hi,

I requested a two-hour WG meeting slot for the Stockholm IETF. The
ISMS WG meeting is currently scheduled for Monday July 27th in the
late afternoon session, 17:40-19:40. The goal of the meeting is to
work on the following two items:

a) DTLS/TLS transport model(s)

   We have <draft-hardaker-isms-dtls-tm-04.txt> as starting point for
   the discussion. Wes, do you plan to submit a revised version by the
   deadline (July 13th)?

b) RADIUS / VACM management policy integration

   I like to encourage people to submit individual draft(s) that can
   be discussed during the meeting. The proposals should be in scope
   with the new ISMS charter currently being reviewed. The deadline
   for new IDs is July 6th.

The meeting should focus on working out and answering the fundamental
questions so that afterwards we can concentrate on getting the
documents say the right things with the right words - something that
can be done reasonably well via the mailing list. Assuming the
rechartering process has been completed by the Stockholm IETF meeting,
we can have initial WG documents shortly after (or even during) the
IETF week.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany
Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>

---

From: "Dave Nelson" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2009 10:08:57 -0400

Juergen Schoenwaelder writes...

>    with the new ISMS charter currently being reviewed. The deadline

It seems possible to do that -- now.  I've resisted doing that heretofore
for two reasons (a) it would be waste of my time if the revised charter
isn't accepted and, more importantly (b) it hasn't been clear the WG has a
rough consensus on a design approach.  The lengthy debate on the list this
past two weeks demonstrates that.  In fact, many design details are yet to
be worked out.  It seems fruitless to write an I-D that's going to be 80%
wrong, just to stimulate debate.  :-)

> can be done reasonably well via the mailing list. 

I will not be in attendance at IETF 75 because of schedule and travel
limitations.

---

From: Wes Hardaker <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2009 09:13:56 -0700

>>>>> On Sat, 20 Jun 2009 10:11:02 +0200, Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]> said:

JS> a) DTLS/TLS transport model(s)

JS> We have <draft-hardaker-isms-dtls-tm-04.txt> as starting point for
JS> the discussion. Wes, do you plan to submit a revised version by the
JS> deadline (July 13th)?

I do have a revised version that I'll likely publish next week that
takes into account incorporating TLS.  I have a few questions that
should accompany it to the working group and would like to use some of
the time at the meeting to discuss the certificate to/from securityName
mapping.  I won't need a full hour, though, so that should give plenty
of time to the radius/VACM work which is more contentious at this point.
-- 
Wes Hardaker
Cobham Analytic Solutions