IAOC Call at 10:00 AM EDT, Thursday, 29 October, 2009 Participants: Lynn St. Amour [PRESENT] Fred Baker [PRESENT] Marshall Eubanks [PRESENT] Bob Hinden, Chair [PRESENT] Russ Housley [PRESENT] Ole Jacobsen [PRESENT] Olaf Kolkman [PRESENT] Ray Pelletier [PRESENT] Henk Uijterwaal [PRESENT] Karen O'Donoghue [SCRIBE] Draft IAOC Agenda 1. Minutes 15 October, 2009 03 September, 2009 19 November, 2008 26 September, 2008 18 September, 2008 04 September, 2008 21 August, 2008 03 July, 2008 2. IETF 79 Venue Approval (Nov 2010) 3. RFC Editor Update 4. Python IDIQ RFP Approval 5. WG and Author Specifications Contract Approval 6. New Revenue: Annual Giving Program 7. IAOC Legal Counsel 8. Meeting Insurance Update 1. Minutes ========== The following sets of minutes were distributed prior to the meeting for IAOC member review. Minor edits were provided via the email distribution list. The objective is to approve these minutes with the incorporated edits discussed via email. 15 October, 2009 03 September, 2009 19 November, 2008 26 September, 2008 18 September, 2008 04 September, 2008 21 August, 2008 03 July, 2008 Marshal Eubanks moved and Russ Housely seconded a motion to approve the above sets of minutes with the associated edits. There were no objections and the motion carried. Olaf Kolkman commented that there was a big improvement in the quality of the minutes. Thanks were expressed to Jewellee for her efforts. 2. IETF 79 Venue Approval (Nov 2010) ==================================== Ray Pelletier summarized the status of the IETF 79 venue selection. The meeting contract has been completed with virtually no liability to the IETF. They have agreed to provide a shuttle service, and the guest room block is substantial. Ray provided a draft resolution on the mailing list. Marshall Eubanks moved and Bob Hinden seconded the draft resolution. The floor was opened for discussion. Olaf had provided an additional paragraph for inclusion in the resolution on the mailing list. This paragraph addressed the fact that the IAOC had listened to the community. There was some discussion about whether or not the paragraph was necessary. The announcement to the community will be derived from the resolution text. A question was raised about whether there would be an expectation of similar motions for future meetings. The feeling of the IAOC was that this case had unique issues that required such a detailed motion. Olaf's paragraph was accepted with minor editorials. The final motion reads: Beijing Venue Contract Resolution Whereas the Shangri-La Beijing Hotel is able to provide qualified meeting space, technical infrastructure, and guest rooms under one roof for IETF 79, Whereas the costs for guest rooms, meeting space, and food and beverage are judged reasonable, Whereas the Special Agreements provision of the Hotel contract that had been the subject of a community survey and on IETF lists has been removed and thus the objection of many to onsite participation, Whereas the Host has negotiated a contract with the Venue under terms and conditions that are now acceptable Whereas the Host has assured the IAOC that 'a normal IETF meeting can be legally held in China and that no pre-screening of material or monitoring of session content is required or will be done,' Whereas the IAOC, based on the assurances of the Host and a history of the venue successfully hosting major international conferences that relate to our industry, believes a normal IETF meeting can be held at the venue, Whereas the IAOC heard all arguments made on the list, and made its determination on the ability to hold a successful meeting i.e. run it in a fashion as we always have, using the tools that we always have, with a critical mass of the traditional participants, discussing the usual topics. Whereas the Meetings Subcommittee has recommended the approval of the Hotel contract by the IAOC, Resolved that because the special provisions in the hotel contract have been removed and the IAOC has received assurances from the host that it can hold a normal IETF meeting as described above, the IAOC approves the venue contract between the Host and the Hotel and authorizes the Host to execute the contract with the Hotel, and Further, that the IAOC approves Beijing, China as the site for IETF 79 in November 2010 upon the execution of the venue contract and an Agreement between the Internet Society and the Host regarding the responsibilities and roles of the Internet Society under the hotel contract. A roll call vote was held, and the motion passed unanimously. Lynn St. Amour [YES] Fred Baker [YES] Marshall Eubanks [YES] Bob Hinden [YES] Russ Housley [YES] Ole Jacobsen [YES] Olaf Kolkman [YES] Henk Uijterwaal [YES] Bob Hinden reminded the IAOC that other issues are likely to come up, and the IAOC is going to need to be diligent and push back as appropriate. The next step is to execute the contract. 3. RFC Editor update ==================== Olaf Kolkman provided an update on the RFC Editor transition. There have been several long IAB calls on how to proceed with the selection or other alternatives. Interviews for the Independent Submissions Editor position are ongoing. There have been significant delays, but there is no expectation of insurmountable hurdles. Bob Hinden asked if Olaf would like the IAOC to direct Ray to negotiate some sort of agreement with ISI for Bob Braden's services. Russ Housley moved and Marshall Eubanks seconded a motion to direct Ray to start the negotiations for a consulting contract with ISI. The motion passed with no objections. 4. Python IDIQ RFP Approval =========================== To advance the development of the tools necessary for the extension and enhancement of the Data Tracker it will be necessary to have qualified python-Django software developers under contract. Ray Pelletier provided a draft resolution for the approval of a Python IDIQ RFP. Whereas the IETF has been using the Datatracker system with its database and multiple tools since the 1990's, principally in support of the IESG and the IETF Secretariat Whereas the Datatracker needs to be upgraded, enhanced and extended to include the entire life cycle of the Internet-Draft process from version -00 to RFC, to support Authors and Working Groups, improve security and provide better management of the process Whereas the Datatracker has been developed over the years by contractors and IETF Volunteers in a valiant effort to support the standards development process without a design architecture Whereas the improvements to the Datatracker cannot be undertaken in the same fashion as in the past and deliver the required functionality in a timely, coordinated and cost- effective manner with an architected design Whereas a Python-Django software development indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity contract would accelerate the development of the needed improvements and improve security Resolved that the IAOC approves the Python-Django IDIQ RFP dated 10-27-09 to be released in November 2009. Russ Housley moved, and Marshall Eubanks seconded the motion. A roll call vote was held, and the motion passed unanimously. Lynn St. Amour [YES] Fred Baker [YES] Marshall Eubanks [YES] Bob Hinden [YES] Russ Housley [YES] Ole Jacobsen [YES] Olaf Kolkman [YES] Henk Uijterwaal [YES] 5. WG and Author Specifications Contract Approval ================================================== Ray provided a draft resolution to do a sole source contract to develop the WG and Author specifications. Henk Uijterwaal moved, and Russ Housley seconded the motion for the purposes of discussion. Extensive discussion on the motion followed. Several folks indicated that they were having a great deal of trouble with the sole source approach. It sets a bad precedent. On the other hand, this task is critical to making progress with the datatraker redesign effort, and successful completion of this specification effort requires a unique knowledge set. And this person is someone who we know would do a through job, has the background to do it, and has the cycles to do it in a timely manner. We can't expect volunteers to keep doing all this, especially in the timeframe that we need it. The concern is not with paying for it as much as doing a sole source contract. The question was raised about turning this into an RFP. The problem with that approach is that it could not be done in time for Hiroshima. We would lose another coding cycle. Bob Hinden wrapped up by saying that given the motion did not carry, we should do an RFP as quickly as we can. The meeting was adjourned as time expired. The following agenda items were deferred: 6. New Revenue: Annual Giving Program 7. IAOC Legal Counsel 8. Meeting Insurance Update