Internet Architecture Board

RFC2850

IAB Minutes 1997-12-09

Home»Documents»Minutes»Minutes 1997»IAB Minutes 1997-12-09

MINUTES FOR DECEMBER 9, 1997 IAB BUSINESS MEETING IN WASHINGTON, DC

PRESENT:

    Fred Baker
    Steve Bellovin
    Brian Carpenter
    Jon Crowcroft
    Steve Deering
    Robert Elz
    Tony Hain
    Erik Huizer
    Cyndi Jung
    John Klensin
    Keith Moore
    Robert Moskowitz
    Charlie Perkins
    Radia Perlman
    Jon Postel
    Abel Weinrib

NEXT MEETING:

    Teleconference Tuesday January 20, 10-12 Eastern Time.

ACTION ITEMS:

    NEW ACTION ITEMS:

    • Abel Weinrib: Make sure there is at least one plenary presentation at next IETF from an IRTF group.
    • Abel Weinrib: Suggest to IESG that they add chairs of relevant IRTF groups to the appropriate area directorates
    • Tony Hain: Put together a crisp problem statement for the NAT/VPN/IPv6 problem.

    OLD ACTION ITEMS:

    • John Klensin: Get CORE shared registry technology explained in Washington IETF.
    • Steve Bellovin: Review SASL draft.
    • Erik Huizer: Investigate whether the IAB should sponsor work on an Internet Network Management Architecture
    • Steve Deering, Radia Perlman, Cyndi Jung: Plan Routing & Addressing workshop with Joel Halpern and Sue Hares.
    • Tony Hain, Charles Perkins (will coauthor): Get Bob Hinden and Bob Fink to produce a document articulating the technical value of IPv6 beyond large addresses.

DRAFTS IN PROGRESS:

  • Brian Carpenter and Erik Huizer: IAB charter (updated RFC 1601).
  • Radia Perlman: What should be in protocols.
  • Steve Bellovin: Security workshop report.

NOTES:

    1. administrivia

      (Decided not to review action items and drafts this meeting.)

      At least one IAB member is covering each of the BOFs at this IETF. Readout on BOFs to date:

      • IP over VBI: Robert Elz has architectural concerns with this one-way, UDP-only transport, and thinks it is a bad idea. Other IAB members were more positive. Discussions will proceed when a charter is submitted.
      • Adaptive applications: good to document techniques, but not standards work, and probably no reason to create a working group. A small group should just get together and write an informational RFC.
      • Logging protocol: probably won’t go anywhere.
      • Content negotiation: name setting and registration for content negotiation.
      • int-serv differentiated service: confused
      • multicast netnews: significant overlap with IRTF reliable multicast group. Their protocol is lousy, but they have a good architecture.
      • spam: somewhat promising technical solution, but they face issues scaling to large scope.

    2. IRTF news

      Brian Carpenter, Erik Huizer and Abel Weinrib will be meeting with Sid Nag later in the week to discuss his proposal to start a research group in management.

    3. Meeting with IAB’s POC reps, Patrik Faltstrom and Rob Austein

      CORE and the contract for shared registry technologies: The winner, Emergent, appears to be competent, with lots of experience with databases. However, the time-table is very aggressive. There is no way for a large company to do this, but they are hopeful that a small company can pull it off.

      NSF wants to terminate the NSI contract in March, which is going to make a smooth transition difficult. The POC (and others) are trying to get NSF to extend the contract for another six months to give more time for the transition.

      Lots of trademark lawyers and trademark holders, politicians, etc. bring strong opinions to the POC, whereas the Internet technical community, which tends to focus on areas of disagreement rather than agreement, is less effective at making its views known. We all need to make sure to emphasize the areas that we agree on; others may not be aware of them. For instance, there is certainly general consensus on the need to maintain a neutral root zone.

      More generally, the big issues that must be resolved quickly are:

        1. Root zone ownership
        2. TLD ownership
        3. Decision on what goes into root zone.

    Joint meeting with IRTF Research Group chairs

      The IAB invited the chairs (and chairs to be) of the IRTF Research Groups to attend the IAB meeting. IRTF Chairs who attended were:

        + Bob Braden
        + Susan Hares
        + Steve Kent
        + Clifford Lynch
        + Allison Mankin
        + Cecilia Preston
        + Karen Sollins

      Much of the discussion centered on how to get more value from the research groups–how to improve the technology and knowledge transfer from the IRTF to the IETF community. This included expression of some concern regarding the existence of limited membership groups. The point was made that some research groups serve as a bridge to people in other technical communities, some bring together a small group of people who feel comfortable enough with each other to share ideas freely, some host large open meetings where a lot of cross-fertilization occurs.

      The research group chairs made a commitment to look for additional opportunities to transfer their results to the IETF community. Some ideas to be acted on include having at least one IRTF presentation at future IETF plenaries and getting the research group chairs and the IESG and area directorates better connected. Regarding how the groups operate, the conclusion was that the different groups need to continue to choose the procedures appropriate for themselves.

      Overall, both the IAB and the Research Group chairs felt that this meeting was worthwhile, and should be repeated on a somewhat regular basis–perhaps yearly.

    NAT/VPN/IPv6 roadmap

      The challenge is that NAT is the easy thing to do in the short term, even though it may be detrimental to the future architecture of the Internet. Moving to something architecturally better appears difficult compared to NAT solutions at any instance in time. The point was made that deployability and good architecture are not necessary the same (e.g., consider the Web).

      On the other hand, Robert Moskowitz described problems he is having doing VPNs through NATs. He has a proposed solution based on global non-routable addresses (“Net66″). A hack, but he doesn’t see any alternative.

      Should these issues be covered in the IAB Routing Workshop? Maybe not, since this is a topic in its own right, and the subject matter experts are probably somewhat different. Do we need to start planning another workshop?

Future Meetings

    Regular teleconference second Tuesday of the month at 10:00 AM Eastern Time.

These minutes were prepared by Abel Weinrib, weinrib@intel.com. An online copy of these and other minutes are available at http://www.iab.org/documents/IABmins. Also, visit the IAB Web page at http://www.iab.org/iab.