 |
 |
 |
Joyce K. Reynolds -- Liaison from the RFC Editor
Lynn St.Amour -- Liaison from ISOC
Patrik Faltstrom -- invited for consideration of Item 4
Ned Freed -- invited for consideration of Item 4
Frank Kastenholz -- invited for consideration of Item 8
Sean Doran -- invited for consideration of Item 8
Aaron Falk -- RFC Editor liaison
2. Review of Documents
3. Liaison Reports
IESG
The IDN effort has been closed down, with the reminder of the
material
going forward as individual drafts. It was reported that there is
current
consideration of a draft articulating value in registry policy in
this space.
The IAB security considerations document is being considered by the IESG. It is anticipated that raised concerns will be addressed with a number of edits in one further revision to this document.
RFC EDITOR
The RFC Editor reported that the Plenary session will include
additional statistics
on the RFC Editor queue and the associated status of documents
in the queue.
IRTF
The IAB noted that the review of the Routing Research Group (RRG)
was
useful and informative, and the IAB thanked Frank Kastenholz and
Sean Doran for their efforts in preparing for this review. It was
hoped that further Research Group reviews could be conducted in the
near future, noting that the face-to-face review was considered of
higher benefit than a teleconference-based review for all
concerned.
The IAB also noted that RGs can request meeting rooms at IETF meetings, and expressed the hope that RGs would continue to use the IETF as a meeting venue.
Vern Paxson noted that in other IRTF activity a group was in the formation stage that was proposing looking at issues associated with names and naming at a higher level than the DNS, and having some relationship to searchable structures and would contain some component of international character sets. If this was to be chartered it was anticipated to operate for 1-2 years.
The MANET WG considered a proposal to move the research component of its activity into a subgroup of the RRG. This met with WG support and a subgroup of the RRG will be formed.
There was also some interest expressed in a peer-to-peer RG with a component related to the JXTA activity. The interest was in JXTA and other peer-to-peer service models and the service distribution function. It was noted that there is some visible difference in approach between the commercial direction in peer-to-peer models and those used within the academic and research community. Such an RG effort may include consideration of scaling to very large numbers of nodes.The IDRM RG has been at a low activity level for some time, and the observation was made that there may be no significant IETF constituency for this topic at present. There has been some thoughts in revising the group's charter to emphasize privacy aspects as expressed as information about individuals and the rights to view such information and in what context. This is being considered by the RG and a decision will be made following this consideration.
The IRSG had also discussed the option of a workshop related to the IAB activity on Internet research topic. This will be further developed by the IRSG.
ISOC
The Board of Trustees of ISOC met on the 16th and 17th November. It
was reported that it was the intent of ICANN to award the .org
registry to a commercial subsidiary of ISOC, with the arrangements
anticipated to be concluded by the end of November and a transfer
scheduled for 1 January.
ITU-T
The IAB had received a copy of a draft ITU-T press release
concerning ENUM, and will be communicating some comments to the
ITU-T in response.
W3C
A joint teleconference with the W3c was held on the week of the
11th November. The topics covered included discussion over
coordination efforts on MIME media types and the Internationalized
Resource Identifiers proposal.
PSO-PC and ICANN
It was reported that no meetings of the PSO had been held since the
previous IAB meeting, and no items to report.
This is a W3C proposal for a new identifier, the Internationalized Resource Identifier (IRI), intended as a complement to the current URI (draft-duerst-iri-02.txt).
While this is an individual submission to the IETF, this draft represents a W3C working group output, and there are W3C working groups, including XML Core, that are indicating some interest in the use of IRI.
The IAB discussed IRIs, noting topics of protocol and presentation elements, equivalence testing, explicit reference to character set encodings, canonical forms for protocol elements and associated preparation functions and normalization, and the issues of comparing composed and single character encodings. It was noted that the relationship of IRIs to URIs is explored in the draft but a detailed review of how IRIs and URIs inter-relate may still be required. It was also noted that there is a lack of a general normalization operation that would allow a deterministic equivalence test for IRIs.
The IAB will review a document describing the weaknesses of the IRI approach in the context of the proposed use as a protocol element, and the issues raised in the IAB consideration of the IRI proposal will be passed to the W3C Technical Advisory Group through the liaison role.
The IAB was requested to review a draft ISOC statement commenting in recent actions by a regulatory body regarding the intended blocking of service ports commonly used by VOIP applications. The IAB discussed the general ramifications of wide scale port blocking. <\p>
The general observation was made that widespread use of port blocking could lead to more cases of protocol design being undertaken in such a manner as to use a common rendezvous protocol and then to negotiate port use in terms of observed capabilities of the end-to-end network path. This could be characterized as a protocol model where the identity of the service and the service payload is deliberately hidden from the network and from various intermediaries that may exist on the end-to-end path. It was also noted that in such cases the design choice regarding protocol behaviour is not being made by the user, but by the protocol or application designer. The implications of such actions on firewall functionality, and the inherent design tradeoffs in this approach were discussed by the IAB.
A document will be prepared on this matter that describes these issues in further detail.
In connection with current activity in the IEPREP WG, the IAB considered the issues relating to the deployment of End-to-End DiffServ in today's IP service networks.
The IAB noted that the issues documented in RFC2990 have not changed substantially regarding the deployability of QoS systems, including signaling feedback issues associated with resource management, and the difference between per-ingress traffic management and per-path resource and performance management. In addition, it was noted that the current extensive overprovisioning practices of transit ISPs tend to obviate the strict requirement for supporting explicitly prioritized traffic in all parts of the Internet.
The IAB noted that this topic was a valid area of continued research activity.
The IAB discussed the manner by which external standards bodies can pass documents into the IETF for consideration. The IAB noted that Internet-Drafts from other standards bodies are currently published with either the editor's name, or the organization's name in the draft title.
The IAB reviewed a draft description of the current process for the publication of IAB documents as informational RFCs. The draft will be revised as per IAB comments and then posted for wider review and comment.
The co-chairs of the Routing Research Group (RRG), Frank Kastenholz and Sean Doran presented a summary of the current status of the RRG to the IAB.
The objective of the RRG is the exploration of problems that are seen as important, but not yet mature enough for engineering work in the IETF, as well as offering an informal forum for reviewing relevant research work. The RRG operates in an umbrella mode, creating more specific subgroups as required to address work in particular areas of routing. It is seen that this represents an appropriate administrative framework for activities that are not-quite-IETF. There is ongoing work on inter-domain and intra-site routing issues, including the traditional intra/inter domain routing split.
Within the inter-domain area the RRG has published two inter-domain routing requirement documents as internet-drafts. It is intended to merge these two documents into a single document for publication as an Informational RFC. There are aspects of the observation that the BGP-inexpressibility of some possible actions constrains the Internet and the fact that BGP can or cannot do something are implicit constraints when phrasing current issues within inter- domain routing. As a general comment, it is recognized that overall level of knowledge in this area is very incomplete.
Micro-mobility sub-group is working on a set of drafts that originated from the SEAMOBY WG activity, and some agenda shaping is currently underway.
At this stage the RG believes that it is still grappling with an effective entry strategy, and it is not of the opinion that its yet time to consider any form of exit strategy. The future plans of the RG include continue work in inter-domain routing, micro-mobility, mobile ad-hoc networking routing issues, consideration of the total routing cost. Outside of these immediate plans the RG is awaiting further ideas and proposals.
While it was noted that there is no strong consensus in the research area as to the future directions of routing, and there are a large number of research topics in this domain.
Rob Austein noted interest in this topic from the IESG, and a consensus that this was a good workshop topic. The issue here is that a number of proposed transition mechanisms create new security issues, and are not necessarily deployable solutions.
Potential outcomes include considerations document in classifying solutions in terms of their risks. The intention is to look more at classes of mechanisms rather than specific mechanisms. In practice it appears that the V6ops WG could use some assistance in this area, and it is intended to coordinate V6 and V6ops WG chairs on this. It is noted that a number of unfinished ngtrans items have not been integrated into the V6ops charter, and the utility and security of various proposed transition mechanisms has yet to be explored.
The proposal is to be recirculated with the intention of preparing logistics for the workshop. IAB Chair
The IAB chair reported to the plenary of the IETF on recent IAB
activities, including the IAB Network Management Workshop, the UNSAF
RFC, the Architectural Considerations RFC, the joint IESG / IAB
retreat and the responses to the ICANN Evolution and Reform process.
ISOC
Lynn St Amour of ISOC presented plaques to IAB and IESG members
whose terms had ended in 2002 in recognition of their service to
the IETF. Plaques were presented to Brian Carpenter, John
Klensin, Henning Schulzerinne, Marcus Leech, and Jon Crowcroft
(absent)
ICANN
An update on ICANN was presented, noting the intended arrangements
relating to the nomination of 2 members to a Technical Liaison
Group, a non-voting liaison to the ICANN Board and 1 (of a total of
19) voting member to the Nominating Committee. The relationship is
noted as becoming predominately liaison related.
IANA
IANA Update report was presented to the plenary session. 13 new
registries have been set up in the July-October'02 period, based on
RFC documented IANA considerations. 2 x /8 IPv4 address blocks were
allocated in July and August and 1 AS block in September. IANA is
working on a process to create a snapshot of the registry. There is
a proposed IANA Matrix to provide guidelines relating to an IANA
protocol assignment process. An IANA ifType application will be
bought up soon, and documents relating to IANA considerations for
RSVP parameters and Port Numbers. A new IANA staff person, Jennifer
Rodriguez to join Michelle Cotton.
The report described the assignment process for RFCs-to-be. The IANA process involves taking the RFC announcements and checking for IANA Considerations relating to protocol parameters. A message will then be sent to authors, WG Chairs and relevant ADs to confirm registry requirements. The IANA then sends confirmation to the RFC Editor of completion of IANA functions and then await confirmation advice from the RFC number to then complete the registry set up.
IRTF
The goals of the IRTF were described. There are currently 12
research groups, generally long-lived without specific
deliverables. Most operate in an open mode, although some are
closed. Noted that the crypto forum is now active. The Internet
Measurement RG is now active and operates in an open mode. The
Interplanetary Internet RG has been transformed into the Delay
Tolerant Networking RG. The Routing RG has added a MANET
subgroup. Potential additional activities include
peer-to-peer technology and searchable names research group.
RFC Editor
Joyce Reynolds and Aaron Falk presented on the RFC Editor role. An
analysis was presented on the RFC Editor queue. It was noted that
the RFC Editor team is reported as 3 x FTE in terms of workload. It
was noted that the arrivals are bursty. The queue size has increased
over mid-2002. There are new management tools to track documents and
to synchronize the RFC Editor activity with the IESG. Staffing
issues have been addressed and SIP and SNMPv3 document burst loads
have been addressed. The RFC Editor is reported to be operating at a
load level that is near capacity. The Auth48 hour step is
particularly onerous for the RFC Editor in terms of processing
changes submitted at this point. Noted that clear concise authoring
with careful attention to format assist here. All authors need to be
contacted for 48 hour approval. There was an IETF audience request
for structural markup to allow for clarity for checking in AUTH48
phase. Also noted some issues with transformation to runoff from the
plain text draft. The RFC Editor reported that the approval to
publish from the IESG, in the view of the RFC Editor related
strictly to the ascii text in a formatted version, and the RFC
Editor did not work from the original pre-format sources. The report
noted that 192 RFCs have been published in the previous 12 months,
with a total of 5,147 pages. RFC Editor draft (2223bis) has been
updated. Improved internal document progress and workload tracking
have been implemented. There is the intention to use an XML index
file, queue statistics and links between RFCs and errata.
ISOC BoT Selection Process
Report on ISOC Board of Trustees selection process was made. A
summary of the 2002 process was presented, noting the nomination of
Fred Baker and Erik Huizer as the outcome. The proposed process was
described, with the phases of an open call, the publication of the
candidate list, IAB selection and IESG confirmation of the selection
of nominations to the ISOC Board. The next step is publication of an
Internet draft and IETF community review of the draft.
IANA Definition
Presentation on draft-huston-iana-00.txt by Geoff Huston. There was
general assent at the plenary for this individual submission to be
adopted as an IAB draft and further developed by the IAB.
UNSAF
Presentation on RFC3424 (UNSAF), noting that while there was a long
term MIDCOM architecture there was a short term set of solutions
that have the risk of sustaining some level of confusion. By
circumventing NATS UNSAF mechanisms may also compromise deliberate
and intended security mechanisms that are associated with NATS and
firewalls, and there is now a round of independent processes
attempting to second guess and outsmart each other.
The IAB was briefed on activities related to initiatives in public funding of research concerning Internet security. Discussion of this topic noted possible benefit in clarifying the agenda concerning the DNS and inter-domain routing through workshops and advanced training activities.
The IAB recommended that ISOC communicate with the public funding program managers and convey the IAB's support for such public funding of research and practice. Some possible examples of the activity could include the generation of a BCP describing responsible operational procedures that would assist in securing IP service platforms, a security gap analysis of IETF standard protocols, and an effort to complete the secure DNS activity to the point of wide availability and use in the Internet.
The IAB considered the potential position of stating a preference to use congestion control as a part of the VOIP transport service with its associated implication of the use of dynamic codec adaptation over the use of non-congestion-sensitive transports coupled with active network response mechanisms.
It was noted that the VOIP spec indicates that transports (RTP) should behave in a good manner. It was noted that the Transport ADs have considered this matter and there is some indication that DCCP is a reasonable direction, with further work required in this area. The IAB explored the scope of a potential comment along the lines of observation and definition of the problem space of voice transport, note the IETF activities in this area, and then note relevant considerations. There is the potential to recommend the use of high quality codecs that can work with what the transport area comes up with in terms of congestion detection and response. It was noted that this direction is along the lines of advocating transport control and congestion signaling to the application level.
The IAB indicated an interest in this activity, noting the requirement to involve the Transport ADs in this at an early stage.
IETF 55 - Atlanta
November 20, 2002
| IANA ifTypes MIBs | 4 |
| Language Tags | 9 |
| Megaco Private Packages | 4 |
| Mobile IP Codes | 1 |
| Private Enterprise numbers | 392 |
| SCTP port numbers | 1 |
| User TCP/UDP port numbers | 25 |
| AKA Versions | 1 |
| CNRP Properties | 5 |
| CNRP Property Types | 10 |
| CNRP Status Messages | 27 |
| COPS Client Types | 2 |
| Internet Message Content Types | 6 |
| Mail Content Disposition Values | 2 |
| MDN Extension Field Names | 1 |
| MIME Media Types | 41 |
| PIBs | 3 |
| Private Enterprise Numbers | 284 |
| RTP Payloads | 1 |
| SDP Attributes | 3 |
| SIP Header Fields | 1 |
| SIP Option Tags | 1 |
| SIP Precondition Types | 1 |
| SIP Response Codes | 2 |
| Transmission Numbers | 1 |
| URL Schemes | 1 |
| URN Informal Namespace | 1 |
| User TCP/UDP Port Numbers | 37 |
| Character Sets | 3 |
| Megaco Error Codes | 1 |
| Megaco Public Packages | 19 |
| Private Enterprise Numbers | 253 |
| SDP Attributes | 2 |
| SigComp Namespace Registrations | 1 |
| SIP Header Fields | 5 |
| SIP Option Tags | 2 |
| SIP Privacy Headers | 1 |
| User TCP/UDP Port Numbers | 23 |
| DHCP Option Codes | 1 |
| Experimental Numbers | 1 |
| GSTN Extensions | 6 |
| IANA ifType MIBs | 1 |
| L2TP Attributes | 4 |
| L2TP Result Codes | 2 |
| Megaco Public Packages | 5 |
| MIB-2 Numbers | 2 |
| MIME Media Types | 5 |
| Private Enterprise Numbers | 303 |
| ROHC Profile Identifiers | 1 |
| SCTP Payload Ids | 1 |
| SDP Attributes | 7 |
| Sieve Extensions | 1 |
| SIP Methods | 1 |
| SVRLOC Templates | 2 |
| User TCP/UDP Port Numbers | 25 |
| (2002) | July | Aug | Sept | Oct |
| IPv4 Multicast | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| AS #s | 0 | 0 | 1 blk | 0 |
| IPv4 RIR Alloc | 1 /8 | 1 /8 | 0 | 0 |
New IANA staff person:
irtf-chair@irtf.org
http://www.irtf.org/
vern@icir.org
November 20, 2002
Goals are to:
Currently, 12 RGs.
Generally long-lived, usually without specific deliverables.
Most operate open, some closed.
Closed ones maintain an open, public mailing list.
| MONTH | # Submitted | # Published | # Not Pub'd |
| July 2002 | 16 | 12 | 1 |
| August 2002 | 19 | 31 | 2 |
| September 2002 | 21 | 30 | 3 |
| October 2002 | 32 | 17 | 4 |
| November 13, 2002 | 17 | 6 | 2 |
| Total in Queue | 105 | 95 | 12 |
| Less than 1 month | 12 | |||||||||||
| 1 - 2 months | 52 | |||||||||||
| 2 - 3 months | 13 | |||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
| More then 3 months | 64 | |||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| TOTAL | 142 |
| draft-klensin-dns-role-03.txt | IESG/TO |
| draft-ietf-mmusic-fid-06.txt | AUTH48 |
| draft-ietf-ippm-ipdv-10.txt | AUTH48 |
| draft-ietf-snmpv3-rfc2570bis-03.txt | AUTH48 |
| draft-ietf-rohc-rtp-lower-layer-guidelines-03.txt | AUTH48 |
| draft-ietf-fax-service-v2-05.txt | REFERENCES |
| draft-ietf-ipv6-default-addr-select-09.txt | REFERENCES |
| draft-ietf-vpim-address-03.txt | REFERENCES |
| draft-ietf-rmt-pi-alc-08.txt | REFERENCES |
| draft-ietf-rmt-bb-lct-04.txt | REFERENCES |
| draft-ietf-dhc-csr-07.txt | RFC Editor |
| draft-ietf-rmt-info-fec-03.txt | RFC Editor |
| draft-ietf-rmt-bb-fec-07.txt | IANA |
| draft-ietf-apex-presence-06.txt | IESG |
| draft-ietf-jl-pcdp-01.txt | IESG/TO |
| draft-tiwari-appl-wxxx-forms-01.txt | IESG/TO |
| draft-wu-rgmp-01.txt | IESG/TO |
| draft-wildgrube-gnp-03.txt | IESG/TO |
| draft-eastlake-proto-doc-pov-04.txt | IESG/TO |
| draft-new-apex-server-02.txt | IESG/TO |
| draft-agrawal-sip-h323-interworking-reqs-02.txt | IESG/TO |
| draft-heinanen-inarp-uni-01.txt | IESG/TO |
| draft-elson-icap-00.txt | IESG/TO |
| draft-mails-sonet-ces-mpls-05.txt | IESG/TO |
| draft-kindberg-tag-uri-01.txt | IESG/TO |
| draft-tegen-smqp-08.txt | IESG/TO |
| draft-dfncis-netnews-admin-sys-04.txt | IESG/TO |
| draft-mealling-iana-xmlns-registry-03.txt | IESG/TO |
| draft-khan-gaur-secure-mpeg-syntax-00.txt | IESG/TO |
| draft-fleming-ldap-printer-schema-01.txt | IESG/TO |
| draft-arkko-map-doi-07.txt | IESG/TO |
| draft-gustin-goyens-urn-id-02.txt | IESG/TO |
| draft-kunze-rfc2413bis-01.txt | IESG/TO |
| draft-walsh-urn-web3d-00.txt | IESG/TO |
| draft-gurbani-sin-02.txt | IESG/TO |
| draft-ietf-snmpv3-update-proto-08.txt | AUTH48 |
| draft-ietf-snmpv3-update-transmap-08.txt | AUTH48 |
| draft-ietf-snmpv3-update-mib-07.txt | AUTH48 |
| draft-ietf-ospf-nssa-update-11.txt | AUTH48 |
| draft-ietf-snmpv3-arch-v2-02.txt | AUTH48 |
| draft-ietf-snmpv3-mpd-v2-02.txt | AUTH48 |
| draft-ietf-snmpv3-appl-v3-01.txt | AUTH48 |
| draft-ietf-snmpv3-usm-v2-rfc2574bis-01.txt | AUTH48 |
| draft-ietf-snmpv3-vacm-v2-01.txt | AUTH48 |
| draft-ietf-pppext-ppp-over-aal2-03.txt | AUTH |
| draft-ietf-sip-privacy-general-01.txt | AUTH48 |
| draft-ietf-sip-reason-01.txt | AUTH48 |
| draft-willis-sip-path-08.txt | AUTH48 |
| draft-sip-call-auth-06.txt | AUTH48 (Beser Bercak document) |
| draft-ietf-sip-asserted-identity-01.txt | AUTH48 |
| draft-ietf-sipping-nai-reqs-02.txt | AUTH48 |
| draft-herriot-application-multiplexed-05.txt | AUTH48 |
| draft-okamoto-mac-over-mapos-02.txt | AUTH48 |
| draft-kzhang-crane-protocol-03.txt | AUTH48 |
| draft-ietf-ipsec-dhcp-13.txt | REFERENCES |
| draft-ietf-iptel-cpl-06.txt | REFERENCES |
| draft-ietf-pppext-ppp-over-aal2-class-02.txt | REFERENCES |
| draft-ietf-vpim-vpimv2r2-05.txt | REFERENCES |
| draft-ietf-vpim-vpimv2r2-32k-03.txt | REFERENCES |
| draft-ietf-vpim-vpimv2r2-dur-03.txt | REFERENCES |
| draft-ietf-avt-rtp-mime-06.txt | REFERENCES |
| draft-ietf-avt-rtcp-bw-05.txt | REFERENCES |
| draft-ietf-vpim-hint-08.txt | REFERENCES |
| draft-ietf-rohc-sigcomp-extended-04.txt | REFERENCES |
| draft-ietf-rohc-signaling-req-assump-06.txt | REFERENCES |
| draft-ietf-ipv6-cellular-host-03.txt | REFERENCES |
| draft-irtf-nmrg-snmp-tcp-09.txt | REFERENCES |
| draft-ema-vpim-cb-02.txt | REFERENCES |
| draft-zeilenga-cldap-02.txt | REFERENCES |
| draft-chiba-radius-dynamic-authorization-05.txt | REFERENCES |
| draft-ietf-rohc-sigcomp-07.txt | RFC Editor |
| draft-ietf-diffserv-pib-09.txt | RFC Editor |
| draft-ietf-rap-framework-pib-09.txt | FC Editor |
| draft-rajeshkumar-mgcp-atm-package-07.txt | RFC Editor |
| draft-andreasen-mgcp-rfc2705bis-05.txt | RFC Editor |
| draft-ymbk-arch-guidelines-05.txt | RFC Editor |
| draft-ohta-mpls-label-value-03.txt | IANA |
> (this is online, link to follow.)
| EDIT | 7.1 wks |
| RFC-EDIT | 3.8 |
| AUTH48 | 1.6 |
| 9.7 wks | |
| For independent submission add: | |
| ISR | 5.2 wks |
| TO | 5.8 |
| 11.0 wks | |
| - For AUTH add | 1.2 wks |
| - For IANA actions add | 3.5 wks |
| - For REF add | 7.1 wks |
| - For IESG noodling add | 9.4 wks |
This definition is not intended to alter or redefine the role of the IETF-IANA as currently undertaken by ICANN
These minutes were prepared by Geoff Huston; comments should be sent to iab-execd@iab.org. An online copy of these and other minutes is available at: http://www.iab.org/documents/IABmins/
The IAB Web page is at http://www.iab.org
|
Index of IAB Meeting Minutes |
|
