* WGs marked with an * asterisk has had at least one new draft made available during the last 5 days

IETF 73 (Minneapolis)

Proposed BOFs (not necessarily officially approved):


  • Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (ldap)
    • Status: Requested
    • Responsible AD: Chris Newman
    • Drafts: TBD, likely any active I-D with -ldap- in its name will come up in this BOF
    • Agenda: TBD
    • Charter: See http://www.openldap.org/lists/ietf-ldapbis/200809/msg00004.html
    • Discussions: ldapext@ietf.org
    • Summary and scope: This BOF is intended to discuss the formation of a new WG to undertake LDAP standardization tasks, including revision of existing specifications and engineering of new LDAP extensions.
  • MORG BOF (Message ORGanization)
    • Status: Requested 2nd BOF
    • Responsible AD: Chris Newman
    • Proposed Charter: Proposed Charter
    • Mailing List: morg@ietf.org
    • Info: At last IETF meeting, concern was expressed about IMAP bloat, but this group was felt to be addressing an area of weakness in the specifications where there was a mixture of needed proposals and some the group should reject. This is a placeholder while the WG is being formed.



Operations and Management




  • Content Rights Management/Digital? Rights Management
    • Status: Two long time IETFers approached me independently in Dublin to suggest IETF take on work in this space. I am doubtful that the IETF is the right venue for this work, but suspect it is needed. My recollection is that related work has been proposed and rejected in the past (e.g., the perm bof), and would need to see evidence that the community would be more supportive this time. I have suggested a bar bof in Minneapolis as an appropriate first step.
    • Responsible AD: Tim Polk
    • Discussions: None (side discussion only)
    • Summary and scope:

Discussions with interested IETFers have ranged from vague indications of need to specific proposals for a protocol based on the RFC 3852 and the Ford/Wiener? Key Release Patent. This patent is nearing expiry, and there is some thought that the patent holder would agree to RANDZ terms if the IETF chose to develop a Content Rights Management protocol that leveraged this patent.


  • 64coexist
    • Status: Requested
    • Responsible AD: INT or TSV
    • Drafts: Multiple, see v6v4 interim meeting
    • Agenda: TBD
    • Charter: Not intended to form WG
    • Discussions: v4v6interim@ietf.org
    • Summary and scope: The v6v4interim meeting in Montreal is covering topics related to several IETF working groups (v6ops, 6man, behave, int-area, softwires). Although the results of the Montreal meeting will be communicated to the IETF community in email, it is anticipated that the IETF community will want the conclusions presented and discussed in a larger forum.
  • TANA
    • Status: I've put in a slot request for TANA. I'm hoping that TANA can be chartered before MSP (a charter is being crafted and will be circulated for review soon) and the slot will be the first WG meeting. If that doesn't happen, I may use the slot for a second BOF with a focus on producing a charter.
  • Discussions: tana@ietf.org

Area TBD

  • RECIPE (Reducing Energy Consumption with Internet Protocols Exploration)