ETF 66 was held in the Palais des congrès in Montréal, Canada, close to the city’s Chinatown and a short walk from the famous old town. We shared this enormous facility with a conference on pediatric pulmonology, and from its attendees we learned that we could be far more imaginative in our naming of meeting rooms. Their exhibit area, for example, was named Thoracic Park.
IETF 66 was hosted by Ericsson Canada which, with the help of Combat Networks and a team of dedicated volunteers, provided excellent wireless networking throughout the week. More than 1,200 people from 44 countries attended. Notably, more than 70 people named China as their country of origin. As always, the week was a busy combination of working group (WG) meetings, BoF (birds-of-a-feather) sessions, research groups, and formal and informal meetings of all kinds on the side.
IETF 66 Facts and Figures1236 registered attendees
from 44 countries
4 new WGs
13 WGs closed
463 new Internet-Drafts
852 updated Internet-Drafts
80 IETF Last Calls
96 approvals
around 138 published RFCs (88 standards and BCPs)
1 appeal
Since IETF 65, four new WGs were chartered and 13 WGs were closed, leaving approximately 120 WGs currently chartered. Between the meetings, the WGs and their individual contributors produced 463 new drafts, not to mention 852 updates. The Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) approved 96 drafts for publication as RFCs. For the first time in several years, this was fewer than the number of RFCs published during the same interval – evidence that the publication backlog is getting smaller.
The IESG has opened a new section on the IETF Web site for material provides by IESG (see http://www.ietf.org/IESG/content). Among other things, the site includes a link to the IESG’s own wiki, an informal guide to IESG procedures that was developed as a collaboration among Area Directors.
The IESG has decided to start session scheduling for future meetings two weeks earlier to allow extra time for resolving clashes in the draft agenda. Similarly, BoF requests must now be sent earlier to allow extra time for evaluation. Deciding which BoFs to approve is one of an Area Director’s most important tasks, and it requires consultation with both the IESG and the Internet Architecture Board (IAB).
Scheduling information for the next IETF meeting may always be found via http://www.ietf.org/meetings/meetings.html. I look forward to seeing many of you in San Diego, California, USA, from November 5-10, 2006.