Subject: [TOOLS-DEVELOPMENT] Tools Call - 15 Feb 2012

From: Steve Conte <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2012 09:08:45 -0800

Tools Call - 15 Feb 2012

Attendees:
Henrik Levkowetz
Steve Conte
Ryan Cross
Bob Hinden
Robert Sparks
Russ Housley
Ray Pelletier
Alice Hagens
Steve Young
Peter Saint-Andre 
Alexa Morris
Glen Barney

Agenda:

1.  Current Projects Status

	a.  DB Conversion WO #8 - IOLA
	
	RP: Implementation phase.  Close to last work order associated with this 
	
	b.  Secretariat Tools Conversion to New DB Schema - AMS
	
	RC: Finishing up the last part, most of it already to staff for testing
	ready by end of the week.  Small reporting asks that won't be needed until
	01 Mar.  Will be finished by end of next week.
	
	c.  Back End Development - IOLA
	
	RH: IANA sent them questions
	HL: IOLA has answered Michelle's email, not sure if there's more from IANA
	RH: IANA is working it steadily, but doesn't have a dedicated resource 
	RP: Last piece of datatracker lifecyle once completed
	RH: Yes.  Indended to be put on the new database
	RH: Should be done July
	
	d.  Agenda Scheduling Specs - AMS
	
	RP: Specs have been passed to RH and RP.  Some commments in which HL has responded
	Should be in a state to be turned into an RFI (next step in process)
	RH: Sent specs to IAOC (and HL) this morning 
	Intent is next step is RFI with this SOW and get comments from bidders concurently 
	from broader community and will send to more than the pre-approved IDIQ bidders 
	RP: Could use input on to whom outside the IDIQ bidders could this be sent to 
	RH: BH did a search and found a few.  BH sent an email with results
	
	e.  Remote Participation Services Spec Dev - Hoffman
	
	RP: Hoffman has been busy and list has been active.  Some discussion about costs
	if charged service.  
	RH: BoF in Paris, to focus on getting input on how remote participation went during 
	the week for those using any remote participation tool so as to gather the experience
	(what went right, wrong, what we'd like different)
	
	f. xml2rfc bugs
	
	HL: bug has been fixed by concentric sky (CS), but another problem that hasn't been fixed 
	yet.  Desires for changes/updates and HL trying to implement changes.  Discovered that
	it wouldn't build.  CS sent HL instructions to build, but runs into new issues.  HL 
	desires the ability to rebuild without the reliance on CS.
	RH: agree that they haven't delivered until we can rebuild it
	RH: Can this be handed to someone else?
	HL: Yes.  Sent a mail to xml2rfc list about a week ago summarizing status and 
	asking who's now in charge of the DTD.  Suggested that those who maintained old 
	version could take over.  No response.
	RH: Doesn't stop us from deploying 
	HL: Ask CS to rebuild the one that is broken and then will be ready to deploy 
	CLI version should be deployable, GUI ver is problematic
	AH: does it include the boilerplate for RFC5741
	HL: CLI ver should have it
	AH: hasn't been able to test a version that has the RFC5741 boiler plate 

2.  DB Cutover Schedule

RJS: One of these projects should be turning off the pre-django version of the datatracker
which project has it on Schedule
RH: Database conversion should be doing that 
RJS: Is that explicit in the project?
HL: Has taken it to be a step in the cutover and have sent mail yesterday discussing this
with Ryan.  Will forward to list.  
Currently, all document related stuff is carried over every 5 mins, full conversion every
night.  Between 01:00 - 02:30 PST.  From mysql logs, can extract what changes are being
done to old DB and can know what's being done.  Plan was to shut off old one, link in 
new one to regular ULR and let that be production one.  Will be done in the next two weeks.
RH: Secretariat will perform the last step (linking)
HL: AMS or Henrik can do it.  Glen concurs 
RH: AMS should be aware of the steps in case something goes wrong

	Decision Point
	
RH: When will this happen?  Nothing indicates that we will be delaying.  Recommendation?
HL: One ask; can we have a number of people on the IESG do some of their normal duties on
the new DB.  RJS has tested already but would like for more people to use it.  IESG is one
of the major input groups for the tracker so that testing can only be done by them.  Important
that that piece is OK for changeover
RH: acknowledge and note that a bug report has come from an AD.
BH: How many people have touched it
RH/HL: Over 500 hits and over 300 pages accessed. 89 unique IP addresses 
RB: Worth noting that once this goes, there's no going back.  Now's the time to test it
RJS: kind of things found while testing were not show stoppers.  mechanics of capturing 
the data have been flawless
RP: who'll be doing the fixes on the fly.. which contractors?
RH: IOLA and AMS 
RC: confirms that he'll be available
HL: will also be available
RP: Noting that there is 9 hours between AMS and IOLA

>>>> Proposed dates for cutover are 18th or 25th of Feb.

RH: US has a holiday on the 20th.. recommending the 25th
BH: Suggest we send another testing announcement with cutover date reflected in the note
RH: Thurs ask for testing on IESG telechat
HL: To confirm with IOLA to be on standby on agreed upon cutover weekend 
HL: After cutover, suggest running an issue tracker instead of sending to mailing list

RP: doing any education or training in Paris?
RH: Hope that there's nothing to see

3.  Paris Code Sprint

RJS: On track, no significant changes since last discussion
RH: ICANN developer is planning on attending IETF.  Not sure if they'll be there for Sprint
RJS: Do we know the room yet? Terminal Room?
AM: Yes

4.  NomCom Tools 

RP: found someone to help write spec
RH: work is just beginning but has a good start

5.  Wiki Server Move to AMS

GB: AMS and HL have been communicating and agreed that this won't be put on the table until
DB conversion is complete
RP: HL and RP discussing server, waiting for an invoice 
GB: if content is moved to AMS, it will be moved to AMS cloud 
HL: started out that current host for wiki is underpowered.  HL started to think about 
getting a server that could handle the load and placing at AMS.  when got question from 
AM it was discussed about migrating and integrating into infrastructure.  Is something 
to consider but that work is bigger than just the tools server that will handle the 
load for wiki.  RP has said he can fund a server if we want to put it in AMS,  HL also
has some leads on some existing servers that can be used for the wiki.  3rd option is a 
virtual server, but experience is that it doesn't work as well as dedicated servers.
Near term: beginning of march has a server which will be available in Palo Alto and can have
shipped to AMS for install.  If that doesn't work, then we can take RP up on his offer
RH: Any issues with infrastructure 
GB: No issues.. have room and happy to rack the server
HL: May have to put new drives in it.  Can RP fund the drives?
RP: Yes 
GB: Suggest a couple of spares when purchasing new drives 
HL: HL will get server shipped to AMS.  GB will look at it.  HL to investigate drives 

6.  AOB

Meetecho Request: 
RP: Meetecho will be in paris and will provide as much service as they can.  Will be helpful
if a laptop were available in each room and a server
GB: we have an old tools server that is out of service that may be good for this service
HL: zinfandel?  It crashed and hasn't wanted to take it into service without more information
around why it crashed in the first place.
RP: can check with VeriLAN to provision and what the costs would be

Meetecho Archive:
RJS: archives that they have kept are very nice, including html5 presentation.  They currently
serve that.  Have we considered asking for a copy for IETF to run?
RH: would like AM to find out what it would take to add to proceedings but seems like a
reasonable thing to do
AM: Agree 
RH: Manually put in the new information to proceedings tool
RH: AM to reach out to Meetecho
GB: should consider if there's any backend software to operate 

Mail list spec:
RH: Sent out for comments and it may have received all the comments it'll get
next step RFI?
RJS: yes.  some feedback was to split out IMAP from other and treat as
two projects
GB: Steve Young has been given that project, progress but no new progress
RH: what's the block?
SY: has all he needs to enlist Alexi 
RJS to strip the IMAP part out of spec
RH: like schedule tool, should go beyond IDIQ vendors because maillist is a different
core competency.  
RH: RH to reach out to apps AD with RJS's spec

-----
Steve Conte
Internet Leadership Programmes
The Internet Society
[email-masked]