[16:57:13] --- mrose has joined
[17:00:53] <mrose> hofmann: welcome.
[17:01:18] <mrose> eric to take minutes
[17:01:40] <mrose> h: 2-5 mins on the older 5 docs; then focus on 5 active docs and open issues
[17:01:51] <mrose> h: no tutorials today, only discussion of open issues
[17:02:04] <mrose> h: last 10 minutes to talk about wg future
[17:02:27] <mrose> h: no agenda changes
[17:02:38] <mrose> h: 10 docs for the wg
[17:02:49] --- burgere has joined
[17:03:02] <mrose> h: 2 docs w/ rfc editor, including scenario doc
[17:03:22] <mrose> h: 2 docs under iesg review (scenarios, threats)
[17:03:34] <mrose> h: remainder are active docs
[17:03:58] <mrose> correction docs under iesg review: authoriation, threats
[17:06:16] <mrose> h: abbie barber[b] to discuss iab considerations doc
[17:06:43] <mrose> correction: barbir not barber
[17:07:13] <mrose> b: brief summary, current considerations, open issues, q&a
[17:07:38] <mrose> b: purpose to address iab considerations for opes rfc
[17:07:54] <mrose> b: goal discuss what we can and can not address wrt to the rfc
[17:08:09] <mrose> b: 9 considerations in rfc3238
[17:09:31] <mrose> b: now going through each one
[17:10:27] <mrose> b: e2e issue is a large one
[17:10:52] <mrose> b: if e2e is in use, then opes is not in use
[17:11:14] <mrose> b: if intermediaries are used, the architecture allows e2e encryption between intermediaries
[17:12:39] <mrose> b: other clarifications winding down
[17:12:52] <mrose> b: since last wg meeting, e2e text added plus some touch-ups
[17:13:25] <mrose> b: optional notifications being finished
[17:13:43] <mrose> sally floyd: i think the document is reasonably clear
[17:14:16] <mrose> h: abbie will make last set of changes and then we do wglc
[17:14:25] <mrose> b: processor and endpoint communication documnt
[17:14:44] <mrose> b: summary - one section on tracing, another on bypass
[17:16:38] <mrose> b: do we allow trace adaptations or not?
[17:17:10] <mrose> b: trace information is designed for administrators, not users
[17:19:04] <mrose> b: bypass opes services doesn't mean that the opes system is being bypassed, only the adaptations
[17:21:21] <mrose> floyd: meta-comment: you don't need to view 3238 as a legal document, look for the intent, not the letter
[17:23:17] <mrose> b: added a new section on bypass, plus MUST/SHOULD/MAY cleanup
[17:24:23] <mrose> b: is order important in trace?
[17:25:16] <mrose> b: what gets returned if opes is not available, what should be returned?
[17:26:48] <mrose> floyd: not sure about the answer, but the concern is about data integrity
[17:27:55] <mrose> b: still some issues on what, exactly, can be bypassed
[17:28:38] <mrose> b: next doc, ocp draft
[17:30:07] <mrose> ocp defined as the glue between protocol profiles (e.g., http) nd ransport (i.e., tcp)
[17:30:41] <mrose> b: lots of changes since vienna, please see changelog at end of current doc
[17:31:04] <mrose> b: should ocp draft have authentication section or should this be in a separate document?
[17:31:48] <mrose> b: should a full adaption example be present?
[17:32:37] <mrose> b: there are original and adapted ids... should we keep both?
[17:33:11] <mrose> b: doc being wrapped up
[17:34:01] <mrose> h: now talking about http binding document
[17:34:23] <mrose> h: defines an http profile for the ocp core
[17:34:47] <mrose> h: stable document, hopefully wglc at end of month
[17:35:43] <mrose> h: bypass feature added, responses added (e.g., errors), http mssage part handling, c-t-e, and content-dependent headers (e.g., content-length)
[17:36:22] <mrose> h: http-specific security is empty... that's a problem
[17:37:51] <mrose> h: dealing with http blocking -- when request overlaps response
[17:39:50] <mrose> h: how to handle 1xx, 206 responses?
[17:40:42] <mrose> h: moving on to the processing language doc
[17:41:24] <mrose> h: we dropped irml the document, and moved many concepts to th "p" document
[17:42:41] <mrose> h: can we get a stable version by end of month?
[17:44:10] <mrose> h: how much message payload, if any, can p examine?
[17:44:25] --- mrose has left
[17:45:21] --- mrose has joined
[17:46:11] <mrose> h: need to make sure we stay within the current charter
[17:46:40] <mrose> ted hardie: the wg needs to specify where the line is, in terms of setting community expectation
[17:47:43] <mrose> h: now onto wg future
[17:48:12] <mrose> h: we are fairly close towards finishing the current charter
[17:48:19] <mrose> h: lots of questions about the future
[17:48:52] <mrose> h: have to satisfy current charter before rechartering.
[17:49:42] <mrose> h: fundamentally, we need to focus on narrow issues for recharter
[17:50:29] <mrose> h: active participation is an issue
[17:51:28] <mrose> h: here's a laundry list of suggestions, none are endorsed, all are enumerated
[17:53:39] <mrose> h: important issue: interaction with lemonade
[17:56:24] <burgere> Marshall asks who's an old-timer.
[17:56:30] <burgere> Lots of applause all around
[17:57:08] <mrose> h; adjourn
[17:57:14] --- burgere has left
[18:00:33] --- mrose has left