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

From: Steve Conte <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 08:38:53 -0700

IETF Tools Committee Call - 15 Aug 2012

Attendees:
Ray Pelletier
Robert Sparks
Russ Housley
Scott Bradner
Steve Conte 
Alice Russo
Glen Barney
Henrik Levkowetz
Steve Young 
Ryan Cross
Bob Hinden
Tony Hansen

1.  Code Sprint

Henrik: nothing new that wasn't said and announced.  A few people who expressed regrets
after collision with IAB Workshop and Code Sprint. 

Deliverables are listed in the change log / announcement

RjS: Already Deployed
RH: Codesprint was unique as it had new code for enron reviews and discovered problems in 
other code.  Need to figure out when deploy that we grep other code to ensure that it 
catches other code.

RjS: issue was that he changed something that the telechat tool so things broke.  It got
fixed but identified the process as an issue.

Single deployment environment would be preferred so as not to have to look at different
projects 

GB: Goal was to integrate everything?
HK: unsure, but would be good to do 
GB: Not a priority, can look at it in the future
RH: Would like to make it a priority because of the event at the code sprint 

Put on next tools call discussion: Merging secretariat tools into the main trunk 

GB: should take a couple of months
RH: should track it on the call 

2.  Mail Archive RFP

RP: Closes 31 Aug.  Had several inquiries, some expectation that should get at least
one proposal if not many.

3.  Deployed Tools
	Community ID Tracking Tool
	
HL: have been a few comments.  There is possible new item (?) or something to go to contractor
about.  Isn't happy with some of the design decisions.  Isn't sure that we can have them
use new design without making it a new item.  What is presented to user in tracking page 
where columns are calculated when user opts for document to be shown or with cron job.  
Status then is not reflecting "live" status 

RH: does it fall within the 10% of the original bid, if so then have the budget for these
kind of changes.  If so, then can just authorize to proceed.

RP: any other comments?
HL: Not a lot but seems that people are using it.  
RP: Suggest some kind of promotion of the tool

	WG Charter

HL: users of that are ADs, not a lot of feedback.  However, have had an inquiry from a 
WG chair that wants to use the tool.  HL explained that it's only for the ADs.  
RjS: to clarify, only the AD can intiate.  Once initiated, chairs can use the tool

RP: How much use on the front end tool?
HL: can't provide figures at the moment
RH: when sure it's meeting basic needs, then last step (publication request) should force
the tool use.

4.  Projects in Work Update - Henrik
	Charter Milestone Management Development - IOLA	
	Back End Development - IOLA

HL: Expecitng to get status report by this Friday.  Has had access to IANA functions so
close to completion.

HL spoke with ICANN/IANA in Vancouver and sorted out an issue 

	NomCom Tool Specs - Suresh
	
RP: are we in a position to produce an RFP?
RH: Yes
RP: will bring to IAOC for that.  RH has sent key sizes supported in a separate email
	
	Remote Participation Services Spec Dev - Hoffman

RH: expecting paul to finish something.  Paul and Robert are having a dialog.  Awaiting
a new draft and will do a new call for comments.
RjS: execting dialogs with Paul to close next week 

HL: saw gadget that holds iPad.  Because of the quick changing environment, curious if 
we should hold off on development for now.
RH: mostly agree.. looking for next step. Want to get beyond jabber room 
RP: Meetecho has done fairly well 
BH: <cutting out, couldn't understand point>

5. xml2rfc

RH: Ready to deploy?
HL: received full package of everything needed.  not tested yet.  No, but should only be
a matter of hours of work time.  Build Side
AR: Everything that was reported has been addressed.  Feature Side 
RH: Let's build and put it up for beta for community to review

6.  AOB

Liasion Management tool
RjS: spent time at 84 working with Stephanie (amsl).  Finding some things that are 
hacks that alleviate secretariats pain in short term.  Not being able to find Liasion
that hasn't been approved.
RH: sounds right for secretariat side
RjS: hoping that we can put small fixes in for short term, but this cmte should be thinking
about rewrite.
RH: Henrik mentioned this as well.  Question is where the SoW will come from
HL: Need a user of the tool to assist
SB: is this tool used by both IETF and outside users?
RH: yes, we need two users to contribute perspective from both sides 
RH: taking action to find someone to write the SoW 

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