<html><head></head><body><div><div><div><div class="">Hi all,<br></div><div class=""><br></div><div class="">We do still have free agenda time, so please let us know if you'd like to present something of interest to IEPG…<br></div><div class=""><br></div><div class="">W</div></div><div></div><br><div class="gmail_signature"></div></div><br><div><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Jun 30, 2026 at 4:32 AM, Jen Linkova <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:furry13@gmail.com" target="_blank">furry13@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote sh-color-black sh-color"><p class="sh-color-black sh-color">Hi all,
</p><p class="sh-color-black sh-color">
The IEPG is an informal gathering that meets on the <span class="sh-date sh-color-black sh-color">Sunday</span> prior to
IETF meetings. The intended theme of these meetings is essentially one
of operational relevance in some form or fashion.
</p><p class="sh-color-black sh-color">
These presentations / discussions are generally around things like
problems discovered when deploying various protocols, interesting
operational issues or deployments, interesting measurement results,
fun things discovered while building networks, etc. It is much more
operationally focused than an IETF Working Group meeting, and is not a
place to just present your shiny new Internet Draft (that's HotRFC and
<br>
/ or the relevant WG).
</p><p class="sh-color-black sh-color">
So, things like: "If you have a chain of CNAME records, and one of
them is at the apex of a DNS zone, the 3 largest resolver
implementations all do different things. This allows you to
fingerprint resolvers - here are some results….", or "We implemented
BGP Flowspec to allow fast response to DDoS events… and then we pushed
out a rule which blocked access to the controller. This is what
happened after that…" are all great IEPG presentations.
</p><p class="sh-color-black sh-color">
But "Here is my draft. It adds the Foo extension to the Bar protocol.
The format of the Foo extension looks like this…. If a router using
Bar sees this extension, it should increment the Baz counter. The YANG
model for Foo looks like this… " is not — that should be discussed in
the Bar WG, or HotRFC, or Dispatch, or similar…
</p><p class="sh-color-black sh-color">
Previous presentations are here: <a class="sh-color-blue sh-color" href="http://www.iepg.org/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">http:/<wbr>/<wbr>www.<wbr>iepg.<wbr>org/<wbr></a>
</p><p class="sh-color-black sh-color">
More info on the IEPG: RFC 1690 - <a class="sh-color-blue sh-color" href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1690" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">https:/<wbr>/<wbr>tools.<wbr>ietf.<wbr>org/<wbr>html/<wbr>rfc1690</a>
</p><p class="sh-color-black sh-color">
We will have remote participation through MeetEcho.
</p><p class="sh-color-black sh-color">
If you have some sort of operationally relevant topic which you'd be
willing to present, please let the chairs (<a class="sh-color-blue sh-color" href="mailto:iepg-chairs@ietf.org" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">iepg-chairs@<wbr>ietf.<wbr>org</a>) know.
</p><p class="sh-color-black sh-color">
--
<br>
Cheers, Jen Linkova</p></div></div></blockquote></div></div><br></div></body></html>