Re: Moving forward on KINK--deadline for action

I think there's some amount of cart before 
horse going on here: before we set milestones,
etc, etc, it would be nice to know if there
are actual issues or just another round of
editorial clarifications/nits.

		Mike

On Sun, 2005-01-02 at 13:51, Sam Hartman wrote:
> 
> Several people have expressed interest in helping with the KINK
> effort.  That's great to hear.  It looks like we have or are close to
> having sufficient interest to do adequate review.  We also clearly
> have interest in implementing the results of the working group.
> 
> Assuming fairly dedicated effort, I suspect that we can get the
> document into shape within six months and get IESG approval shortly
> after that.
> 
> I'd like to ask the working group chairs to prepare a new set of
> milestones for getting from our current position to a completed
> document.  The milestones should include identifying the issues we're
> going to fix, coming to consensus on fixes and confirming adequate
> review of the result.
> 
> Along with the set of milestones, I'llother  need the names of specific
> reviewers from the chairs.  I'll need a qualified reviewer for
> Kerberos and for IPsec (2401 and IKE).
> 
> 
> I expect the results to work will with Kerberos clarifications and
> draft-ietf-ipsec-rfc2401bis.
> 
> I will have my specific comments on the kink draft to the working
> group by January 20; the working group has already received the
> general areas I'm concerned about.
> 
> In order to set a concrete deadline, I am requesting the milestones
> and reviewers from the chairs by February 7, 2005.  I'm picking the
> deadline because it is the first scheduling deadline for IETf 62.  If
> someone has a preference for another deadline speak up now.  Otherwise
> I'll treat February 7 as a hard deadline: if the milestones and
> reviewers are submitted by then, we'll continue, but otherwise, the
> working group will conclude.
> 
> I'd also suggest that KINK consider meeting at IETF 62.  If we can get
> enough of the people together it will be useful to discuss the issues
> and hopefully come to quick resolution.  Naturally, the decision of
> whether to meet is up to the chairs.
> 
> 
> Sam Hartman,
> 
> Security Area Director

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iQCVAwUAQdicnbMsDAj/Eq++AQKgOgQAnDTYL7DDZFJ9EG42gTguaIozS1QIMIeQ
ojQtwT6kGm57wk5V1WubXaDon+bh8uwvEv4Kwx2FdLNGELU0LdePle2g/QD8PMZy
Z9Ipa6LSKBytIhonCoMbG0RyTiOTpqgGKNTOyV8ZnSxiarvFZ8vT1REsHkxL7uY2
1mWuiEH/VJ4=
=wM71
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----