Internet Architecture Board


IAB Minutes 2002-11-17

Home»Documents»Minutes»Minutes 2002»IAB Minutes 2002-11-17

IAB Meeting

17 November 2002, 2:00pm – 5:00pm EST
19 November 2002, 7:45am – 9:00am EST
19 November 2002, 6:00pm – 7:30pm EST
20 November 2002, 2:00pm – 5:00pm EST
21 November 2002, 8:00am – 9:00am EST


    Leslie Daigle — IAB Chair
    Harald Alvestrand — IETF/IESG Chair
    Ran Atkinson
    Rob Austein
    Sally Floyd
    Ted Hardie
    Geoff Huston
    Charlie Kaufman
    Jim Kempf
    Mike St. Johns
    Erik Nordmark — Liaison from the IESG
    Vern Paxson — IRTF Chair
    Eric Rescorla

    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


    Fred Baker


    Tuesday, 10 December, 2002.


  1. Rollcall, Agenda Bash and Previous Minutes
  2. Review of Action Items
  3. Review of Documents
  4. Liaison Reports and Organization Updates
  5. Internationalized Resource Identifiers
  6. Service Blocking by Port
  7. End-to-End DiffServ and QoS
  8. IAB RFC Publication Procedure
  9. IAB Review of the Routing Research Group
  10. IPv6 Transition Workshop
  11. IAB Plenary Session
  12. ISOC, IETF and Government-sponsored Research
  13. Any Other Business


    0. Rollcall, Agenda Bash and Previous Minutes

    1. Review of Action Items

    2. Review of Documents

    3. Liaison Reports

      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.

      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.

      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.

      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.

      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.

      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.

      It was noted that the IAB liaison nominee to RSSAC, Rob Austein, had not been added to the RSSAC lists. A followup with ICANN over this liaison was noted as an action.

    4. Internationalized Resource Identifiers

      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.

    5. Service Blocking by Port Addresses

      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.

    6. End-to-End DiffServ and QoS

      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.

    7. IAB RFC Publication Procedure

      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.

    8. IAB Review of the Routing Research Group

      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.

    9. IPv6 Transition Workshop

      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.

    10. IAB Plenary Session

      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.

      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)

      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 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.

      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.

      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.

    11. ISOC, IETF and Government-sponsored Research

      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.

    12. Any Other Business

      VOIP Transport Issues

      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.



        Leslie Daigle, Geoff Huston
        Status: domain updated

        •  populate IETF server
        •  redelegate

    • IAB Network Management Workshop
        Ran Atkinson, Juergen Shoenwalder
        Status: Draft published, document progress being tracked, item closed 15 Nov 02

    • RFC Individual Submission review
        Geoff Huston
        Status: Process proposal circulated to IAB and IESG

        •  Discuss at IAB / IESG Retreat

    • ICANN Evolution and Reform Followup
        Leslie Daigle
        Status: Await ICANN adoption of new ByLaws

        •  Appoint liaisons

    • IAB Research Agenda
        Sally Floyd, Vern Paxson, Ran Atkinson, Mike St Johns, John Crowcroft
        Status: Document the need for funding for further research for the Internet. This includes documenting important topics for research

        •  Discussion underway on topic

    • ISOC Trustee Appointment Process
        Leslie Daigle
        Status: publish draft of process

        •  Include section to address the question of the difference between this process and the Nomcom process.

    • IAB IPV6 Deployment Security Workshop
        Eric Rescorla, Rob Austein, James Kempf
        Status: Workshop problem statement that includes emphasis on security consideration of various transition solutions (secure 6-to-4 relay, etc). Proposal drafted

        •  recirculate problem stmt to IAB, V6ops WG chairs, V6 WG chairs and IESG
        •  James to propose venue and logistics – jp location?

    • IAB / IESG Retreat
        Leslie Daigle, Harald Alvestrand
        Status: Closed 15 Nov 2002

    • .ARPA Domain Name Servers
        Leslie Daigle
        Status: Closed 15 Nov 2002

        •  Draft a message regarding the commissioning of additional .arpa secondary name servers

    • SC22 Liaison
        Leslie Daigle
        Status: Closed 15 Nov 2002

        •  Draft a response to SC22 noting that the IAB has already agreed to the original offer of a category A liaison to SC22

    • 802.11 Enrolment
        Leslie Daigle
        Status: Closed 15 Nov 2002

        •  Pass Enrolment material to the IESG with an offer of IAB assistance if required
        •  Meeting in conjunction with IETF55

    • IAB RFC Publication Process
        Geoff Huston
        Status: Draft circulated

        •  revise as per IAB comments and recirculate
        •  Leslie to pass to IESG

    • Internationalized Resource Identifiers
        Ted Hardie, Leslie Daigle

        •  Communicate concerns with IRI draft to W3C-IETF joint list (Ted to prepare, Ned to review, Leslie to pass to joint list)

    • ITU-T ENUM Draft Press Release
        Leslie Daigle
        Status: Respond with desire to remove reference to IETF and Patrik as WG chair

    • IAB comment on ISOC statement regartding Panama and VOIP blocking
        Leslie Daigle
        Status: Is there an IAB consensus position directly relating to this?

    • RSSAC Liaison Status
        Leslie Daigle
        Status: Confirm status of IAB nominated liaison on the RSSAC mail lists

    • Externally submitted drafts
        Ted Hardie
        Status: Document the use of draft-<org>- as a means of document submission into the IETF process for external bodies


    • IAB Considerations

        Sally Floyd
        Status: RFC3426

        1.  (current)

    • Security considerations, including common security attacks

        Eric Rescorla
        Status: Editing

        1.  (current) Comments from IESG members being incorporated – awaiting response on proposed edits
        2.  (next) Completed IETF last call for BCP
        3.  (next) What remains is to get the ADs with DISCUSS comments to say whether or not 01 is satisfactory, and when that done the secretariat will send a protocol action message to the community and to rfc-ed which puts it on the rfc-ed queue. – expected to complete this Oct 23

    • Security Mechanisms for the Internet

        Charlie Kaufman, Steve Bellovin
        Status: IAB Review

        1.  (current) Charlie to incorporate IAB comment
        2.  (next) IETF Call for Input

    • IETF PSO-PC Process

        Leslie Daigle
        Status: Closed 15 Nov 2002

        1.  (current) ICANN PSO is to be replaced by a Technical Liaison Group

    • IAB Considerations for UNilateral Sel-Address Fixing (UNSAF)

        Leslie Daigle
        Status: RFC3424

        1.  (current)

    • A survey of Authentication Mechanisms

        Eric Rescorla
        Status: Editing

        1.  (current) Incorporate comments

    • Referential Integrity
        Fred Baker, Patrik Faltstrom
        Status: Drafting

        1.  (current) draft a document that describes the issues associated with referential integrity

    • Internet Architecture and End-to-End
        James Kempf, Rob Austein
        Status: IAB Review

        1.  (current) IAB Reading
        2.  (next) publish as draft-iab-*-00

    • Network Management Report

        Ran Atkinson, Juergen Shoenwalder
        Status: Review Comments Incorporated

        1.  (current) IAB Review
        2.  (next) Publication as Informational RFC early 03

    • Internationalized Resource Identifiers
        Ted Hardie, Patrik Faltstrom, Ran Atkinson
        Status: Drafting

        1.  (current) Document the issues relating to the proposed use of IRIs as protocol elements

    • Service Identification in packets
        Mike St Johns, Geoff Huston
        Status: Drafting

        1.  (current) Document the issues relating to the possible consequences of widespread port blocking, incl SIP

    • Transport Controls for VOIP
        Geoff Huston
        Status: Drafting

        1.  (current) Document the use of transport control and congestion detection and avoicance for VOIP applications

    • IANA Definition

        Geoff Huston
        Status: Drafting

        1.  (current) Republish draft-huston-iana as an IAB Document
        2.  (next) Careful consistency check with RFC2850

    • ISOC Trustee Appointment Process
        Leslie Daigle
        Status: publish draft

        1.  (current) Include section to address the question of the difference between this process and the Nomcom process.


    Regular teleconference second Tuesday of the month 1500-1700 US East Coast time.

Slides used at the Open IAB Plenary

Slides – Daigle

    IAB Plenary

      IETF 55 – Atlanta
      November 20, 2002


    • Local host keynote address
      • ari Pasanen, Nokia
    • IAB Chair’s remarks
    • ISOC recognition of recent IAB, IESG folk
    • IETF NomCom update
    • Update reports: IANA, IRTF, RFC-Editor
    • Proposed IETF ISOC BoT appointment process
    • Review of IETF-IANA function document
    • Overview of RFC3424 — UNSAF
    • Open mic for architecture

    Chair’s Remarks
    What the IAB has done lately

    • Network management workshop
      • Report draft published (draft-iab-nm-workshop-01.txt)
    • Recent RFCs
      • RFC 3424: IAB Considerations for UNilateral Self-Address Fixing (UNSAF) Across Network Address Translation
      • RFC 3426: General Architectural and Policy Considerations
    • Got together with the IESG (October 17/18, 2002)
    • Various communications.

    ICANN update

    • Current ICANN evolution & reform proposal, with implementation resolutions, calls for IETF input:
      • TLG: appoint 2 technical people to the Technical Liaison Group
      • ICANN BoT: appoint a non-voting liaison
      • ICANN BoT NomCom: appoint 1 delegate annually (of 19 delegate committee)
    • Of note: The Protocol Support Organization goes away
    • Relationship is liaison-oriented

Slides – Cotton

    Report on the IANA

      Presented at: IETF Atlanta
      November 20, 2002

    New Registries

      (Jul-02) Internet Printing Protocol (IPP) Registrations
      (Aug-02) Internet Message Context Types
      (Aug-02) AKA Version Namespace
      (Aug-02) Common Name Resolution Protocol (CNRP) Parameters
      (Aug-02) Permanent IPv6 Multicast Group Identifiers
      (Aug-02) Precondition Types used with SIP
      (Aug-02) Signaling User Adaptation Layer Assignments
      (Sep-02) SIP Privacy Header Values
      (Sep-02) Media Gateway Control Protocol (MGCP) Package Registry
      (Sep-02) Media Gateway Control Protocol (MGCP) Localconnectoptions Sub-Registry
      (Sep-02) SigComp Namespace Registry
      (Oct-02) Reason Protocols (sub-registry of SIP)
      (Oct-02) Semantics for “group” SDP Attribute (sub-registry of SDP)

    Our Workload – Protocols
    July 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

    Our Workload – Protocols
    August 2002

      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

    Our Workload – Protocols
    September 2002

      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

    Our Workload – Protocols
    October 2002

      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

    Our Workload – Addresses

      (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

    Current Projects

    • RFC1700 type document
    • IANA Matrix
    • IANA ifType application
    • More documents on IANA Considerations (RSVP and Port Numbers)
    • New IANA staff person:

        Jennifer Rodriguez

    Assignments for RFC’s-to-be

    • Approval
    • Check for IANA Actions
    • Check with authors/wg chairs/Ads
    • Note to RFC Editor
    • Confirmation from RFC Editor

    Please e-mail any questions to

      Thank you!!

Slides – Paxson

    IRTF Status Report

    IRTF Role & Scope:

      The IRTF serves as the research arm of the IETF.
      Organized under the auspices of the IAB.

      Goals are to:

        (1) foster Internet-related research, and
        (2) develop preliminary technology needed for IETF efforts (includes responding to IETF needs).

      Currently, 12 RGs.
      Generally long-lived, usually without specific deliverables.
      Most operate open, some closed.
      Closed ones maintain an open, public mailing list.

    Recent changes/news:

Slides – Reynolds

    RFC Editor -IETF Report

      55th IETF Meeting
      Atlanta, Georgia


    • Published 192 RFCs in last 12 months
      • That’s 5147 pages (with another 256 pages in AUTH48)
    • Independent Submissions have been added to:
    • Updated draft-rfc-editor-rfc2223bis-03.txt
        “Instructions to Authors”
    • Published RFC 3300
        “Internet Official Protocol Standards”
    • Improved Internal document progress and workload tracking

    Work In Progress

    • XML-Based index file
      • Page counts will be available in the XML version of the index.
    • Improving monthly queue statistics:
    • Improving links between RFCs & errata:

    Policy Updates

    • RFC 2119
      • This must be cited as a normative reference
    • Abbreviations
      • Most abbreviations must be spelled out the first time they appear in a document


      July 2002 – November 2002

      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

    Queue Update

      As of November 13, 2002

      Less than 1 month 12
      1 – 2 months 52
      2 – 3 months 13
        IESG: 1
        AUTH48: 4
        References: 5
        RFC Editor: 2
        IANA: 1
      More then 3 months   64
        IESG: 22
        AUTH48: 19
        References: 16
        RFC Editor: 6
        IANA: 1
      TOTAL 142

    IESG Documents

      As of November 13, 2002
      2 – 3 Months

      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

    IESG Documents

      As of November 13, 2002
      3+ Months

      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

Slides – Falk

    How long does it take to publish an RFC?

      Aaron Falk


    • The RFC Editor has been concerned over the delays in processing RFCs
    • We’ve spent some time analyzing the historical data on the queue
    • This presentation is a chance to inform the community what we’ve learned
    • The challenge with data is that it raises questions as it informs
      • We don’t plan to do further analysis: these are just hints

    The RFC Editor Process

    • Flow and states are defined in this diagram

      > (this is online, link to follow.)

    RFC Editor queue data from July 1999

    • Caution: the data is noisy and incomplete
      • State names & definitions have evolved
    • Missing data in spring ’02
      • This is unfortunate because the delays became quite long in this period

      Values shown are medians

        Distributions have very long tails, means will be skewed by outliers

    Measured Median Time to Publish an RFC

      Simplest path through the graph:

      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

    Measured Median Time to Publish an RFC

      But a given RFC *might* also enter one or more of the following penalty boxes:

      – 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

    If the median is 2.5 months, why does it feel like it’s taking longer?

    • Distgribution has a long tail

    Why have some documents been delayed so long?

    • The RFC Editor is a small team
      • Attention to quality requires time
      • Staffing issues have enhanced visibility
    • Document arrivals are very bursty
    • “Authors 48 hours” is not

    Queue arrival & departure rate per month

    • Note bursts in recent queue

    Queue Size

    Things are getting better.

    • Have new management tools for tracking progress
      • Helps ensure no docs slip through cracks (particularly important with IETF review of Individual Submissions)
      • Bill Fenner’s web page checking IESG/RFC-Ed queue consistancy
    • Short term staffing issues are largely solved
      • Increased editing capacity
    • Recent arrival burst has largely passed
      • SIP, SNMPv3 docs
      • But another may come along any time.

    Challenges Remain

    • RFC Editor appears to be operating near capacity
    • Auth48 is a critical step in ensuring quality
      • Again, at a cost of processing delays

    What Can Authors Do?

    • Submit quality documents
      • Clear, concise writing
    • Pay attention to formatting
      • 2223bis has editorial policies
    • Be responsive
      • Need all authors for final approval


Slides – Daigle

    Review of IETF Internet Society (ISOC) BoT appointment question

    • As of last year, IETF is called on to select members of the ISOC Board of Trustees (BoT)
    • Followed an interim procedure last year
      • Open call for nominees; IAB selection confirmed by IESG
    • Need to formalize a process for this and following years
    • Proposal outline tonight; will be circulated & discussed as I-D soon

    Proposed IETF ISOC BoT appointment process

    • Annually, IAB to post an open call for nominations (on ietf-announce)
    • IAB to publish and select from candidate pool
    • IESG to confirm selection
    • Detail needed: coordination with rest of ISOC BoT election process (org & chapter elections)

    Where from here

    • IAB will draw up an Internet-Draft capturing this proposal, with adequate detail
    • Community review
    • Implement for next year’s appointment to ISOC Board of Trustees

Slides – Huston

    Defining the IANA Role

        Geoff Huston


    • ICANN Evolution and Reform Process
    • The IETF has an interest in ICANN
      • ICANN performs the IANA protocol parameter registration function for the IETF
      • Can we describe, clearly and precisely, the IANA role undertaken by ICANN for the IETF?

    Why Define the IANA Role?

    • We have no agreed description of the IANA function for the IETF
    • What we do have:
      • We have IANA Considerations in RFCs (RFC2434)
      • We have an IAB Charter that says that the IAB is responsible for the IANA function (RFC 2850)
      • We have a MoU with ICANN that describes ICANN’s role (RFC 2860)
    • But no definition of the IANA function itself

    Plenary Proposal

    • That the IAB adopts a formal definition of the role of the IANA for the IETF
      • The “IETF-IANA”
    • That this definition clearly define the IETF’s requirements for protocol parameter registration functions
    • That this definition exist independently of any delegation and/or contractual arrangements that may exist between the IETF and the delegated IETF-IANA operator.
    • That future contracts or agreements may refer to this IETF definition as a statement of work

    Summary of IETF-IANA Role

    • Review and Advise
      • Review Internet-Drafts and advise the IESG of relevant IANA Considerations
    • Register
      • Operate a registry of protocol parameter assignments according to “IANA Considerations”
    • Mailing Lists
      • Operate mailing lists as defined in IANA Considerations sections of IETF documents
    • Liaison
      • Liaison to IESG and IAB
    • Reporting
      • Performance report to the IAB
      • Periodic reports to IETF Plenary

      This definition is not intended to alter or redefine the role of the IETF-IANA as currently undertaken by ICANN


    • Individual Proposal from Geoff Huston and Scott Bradner
    • Soliciting comments from the IETF regarding its accuracy clarity in defining the role of the IETF-IANA
    • Propose that the Internet Architecture Board adopt this draft and submit it through the IETF publication process as a BCP

Slides – Daigle

    UNSAF Considerations (RFC3424)

    • What: “UNilateral Self-Address Fixing (UNSAF)”
      • some originating process attempts to determine or fix the address (and port) by which it is known
      • to be able to use address data in the protocol payload
      • to advertise a public address from which it will receive connections.
    • Why:
      • NATs cause discontinuity in address realms
      • originating process may not know about that discontinuity
      • the mapping is locked up in the NAT box

    Architecture & Reality

    • Dogma: Not a problem if you have end to end, global addresses
    • Long term: Middlebox Communication (midcom)
    • In the meantime: heuristics & work arounds proposed

    Architectural considerations

    • How does an UNSAF client find an appropriate UNSAF server to reflect its address?
      • an address can only be determined relative to one specific point in the network.
    • By circumventing the NAT, UNSAF mechanisms may also (inadvertently) circumvent security mechanisms
      • processes are second-guessing each other
    • Timeliness: UNSAF process must take care to react to changes in NAT bindings for a given application flow, since it may change unpredictably.
    • Brittleness: more points of failure & maintenance of state:
      • UNSAF client & server are required to maintain information about the presumed state of the communication in order to manage the address illusion.

    Practical Realities

    • There is no NAT standard
    • NATs don’t all behave alike
      • may not handle UDP at all
      • Lvariations in timeouts for holding address bindings
      • etc

    Role of RFC3424

    • Tool for documenting these considerations
    • Suggests some things that interim fixes might consider to mitigate the risks
    • Is intended as a “health warning” as to why these short-term fixes should be just that

These minutes were prepared by Geoff Huston; comments should be sent to An online copy of these and other minutes is available at:

The IAB Web page is at