Subject: secure shell minutes from ietf62

From: Bill Sommerfeld <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 16:48:43 -0400

here's my stab at the minutes, including updates.  send comments to this
list.  

(I've already sent this in to the Secretariat; the initial submission
deadline was today but it's possible to revise it once it's sent in for
another couple weeks).

-----

Minutes of the Secure Shell [secsh] meeting at the 62nd IETF.
Thursday 10 March 2005, 1pm-1:20pm

We met briefly to review the working group status and 
to allow a security AD to beat us up.

[A lot has happened since the meeting, so I'm putting updates in
square brackets so as to not confuse people]

1) AD Commentary:

Russ Housley is the shepherding AD for the core drafts.  

They have been before the IESG for 18 months, waiting for resolutions
to various issues.  Through the entire period, there was always one
major blocking issue; exactly which one was blocking changed several
times.

It currently takes 9 IESG members to approve a document; these have
been waiting so long (partly due to waiting for IESG members or the
IPR WG's to act) that due to IESG turnover, only 8 original votes are
left.

Russ gave us 6 weeks to get them on the IESG agenda; if that deadline
was not met, he will send the documents back to the WG requiring full
AD review, IETF-wide last call, etc., because they've been paged out
for so long.  However, he permitted us to proceed assuming the
IPR-WG's in-room consensus on trademark references will withstand
review.  That removes the last non-nit issue.  

2) WG Status:

Document authors should note that the required draft boilerplate has
just changed again.  Update your tools, etc.,

2.1) Core documents:

At the time of the meeting the core drafts were waiting for a respin
which was itself dependent on the resolution to the IPR-WG's
conclusions about trademarks.  The one technical change to the
specification of note related to the use of UTF8 to encode usernames
and password and its interaction with UTF8 normalization; the approach
adopted is parallel to what other working groups (particularly SASL)
have been pursuing in this area.

[As of April 8th, the core drafts have been approved by the IESG and
are now in the RFC Editor's queue.  many thanks to all who helped this
to happen.]

2.2) Extension drafts:

dh-group-exchange:
	Before the IESG, with several open DISCUSS points.
	[draft author has promised to send in a revision when he gets
	back from vacation]

newmodes:
	Expired
	[Resurrected and in WG last call with editorial comments only so far]

filexfer:
	Still active and continued slow work
	[Main issue seems to be one of complexity vs.]

Several other drafts have expired and are in need of reissuance.
[And have been.  A few stragglers still haven't reappeared yet..]
Hopefully the unblocking of the core drafts will permit forward
progress.

3) Milestones.

Milestones badly in need of revision.  Will be updated after
discussion on the list.

---

From: Jon Bright <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 08:49:54 +0200

> 	[Main issue seems to be one of complexity vs.]

vs. required functionality?

-- 
Jon Bright
Silicon Circus Ltd.
http://www.siliconcircus.com