Internet Architecture Board

RFC2850

IAB Minutes 2004-09-14

Home»Documents»Minutes»Minutes 2004»IAB Minutes 2004-09-14

Minutes
IAB Telechat

14 September 2004

ATTENDING

    Leslie Daigle — IAB Chair
    Harald Alvestrand — IETF/IESG Chair
    Rob Austein
    Sally Floyd
    Jun-ichiro Itojun Hagino
    Mark Handley
    Bob Hinden
    Geoff Huston
    Eric Rescorla
    Pete Resnick
    Jonathan Rosenberg
    Bert Wijnen — Liaison from the IESG
    Joyce Reynolds — Liaison from the RFC Editor
    Lynn St. Amour — Liaison from ISOC

APOLOGIES

    Bernard Aboba
    Patrik Faltstrom
    Vern Paxson — IRTF Chair

NEXT SCHEDULED MEETINGS

    Telechat, Tuesday, 12 October 2004, 2100 UTC

AGENDA

  1. Roll call, Agenda Bash and Previous Minutes
  2. Review of Action Items
  3. Review of Documents
  4. IAB Liaison Reports
  5. Updates from IETF Liaisons
  6. IRTF Chair – discussion on process/a>
  7. IAB Liaison to the IETF Nominations Committee
  8. IPv6 ad hoc advisory group progress
  9. Other Regular Business

NOTES

  1. Roll call, Agenda Bash and Previous Minutes

  2. Review of Action Items

  3. Review of Documents

  4. IAB Liaison Reports

      IESG
      Rob Austein, Bert Wijnen:

      • IESG has agreed to publish the telechat agendas in advance of the meeting, to indicate in advance which documents are on the IESG agenda. (http://www.ietf.org/IESG/agenda.html)

      • Aaron Falk is now the RFC-Editor “backup liaison” person to the IESG.

      RFC Editor
      Joyce Reynolds:

        No items to report

      IRTF
      Vern Paxson:

      • The IRTF chair is stepping down at the Washington DC IETF meeting. The IAB is requested to appoint a successor prior to the meeting to enable a smooth transition.

      ISOC
      Lynn St Amour:

      • RFC Editor contract – at the request of the IAB and IETF chairs, the chairs and ISOC’s CEO, are in the process of negotiating a one year extension of the RFC Editor contract (2005 calendar year).

  5. Updates from IETF Liaisons

      ICANN – Liaison to the Board
      John Klensin:

      • Current ICANN activities include consideration of Whois information, the .net registry, and further consideration of sponsored TLD applications.

      • If there are IAB concerns or issues that the IAB wishes to raise with respect to these, or other ICANN activities please let me know.

      RSSAC
      Rob Austein:

      • AAAA IPv6 glue records have now been added to the root zone

      IEEE 802
      Bernard Aboba

  6. IRTF Chair

      The IAB considered the process to be used in appointing a chair of the IRTF. Further consideration of the process in relation to the role of the IRTF will be continued by email discussion.

  7. Update on outstanding IANA requests

      The IAB was briefed on the current status of IAB requests to the IANA. IAB concerns in this matter will be pass to ICANN.

  8. IPv6 ad hoc advisory group progress

      A progress report submitted to the IAB is attached.

  9. Other Regular Business

      Response to ICANN request relating to any IAB coment regarding the .net registry function

        [Leslie Daigle and Geoff Huston recused themselves from IAB consideration of this item due to potential conflict of interest considerations]

        The IAB will pass a public response to ICANN, referring to existing IETF documents and current and poteential DNS-related Working Group activities relating to operation of top level domains.

Attachment

IAB IPv6 Advisory Group Progress Report

    Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004
    From: Thomas Narten
    To: Leslie Daigle

    The following is a status update from the IAB ad-hoc committee that is looking at IPv6 addressing issues.

    First, the following is what we believe our work items are.

    1. clarifying the documentation (in RFCs) about how the IETF wants IANA to manage the IPv6 space. e.g., IANA allocation sizes to RIRs:

    2. HD ratio. Some questions are being raised as to whether the HD ratio is really the proper metric for address utilization and allocation. Question: Is the current HD ratio model (and policies based on them) still the best model, or should we be considering adjustments?

    3. IANA allocation page cleanup (needs update to reflect reality, still uses TLA field which has been deprecated in RFC 3513, consistent and clear terminology for allocation state)

    4. ip6.int deprecation. Now that we have ip6.arpa, can we stop using ip6.int? RIRs are currently populating it, and would like to stop doing so.

      Status: we believe an ID needs to be published and reviewed by the community, then pushed through the system as, e.g., a BCP. Key issue is deciding a date for when deprecating ip6.int makes sense, based on what current implementations actually do.

    To date, we’ve had email exchanges and one conference call. Some early thinking (not a formal recommendation) at this point, includes:

    1. We believe the IETF has a role to play in stewardship of the IPv6 address space. While it is clearly not appropriate for the IETF to micro-manage the IANA/RIR process, the IETF has a long-term interest in seeing that the IPv6 address space is managed prudently, and that a proper balance between aggregation and address conservation is achieved, as envisioned by the IPv6 architecture. In particular, the emphasis on aggregation should be significantly more pronounced in IPv6 than it is (or has been) for IPv4.

    2. IANA appears to be using obsoleted instructions and thinking. See
      http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv6-tla-assignments. The TLA concept was obsoleted by RFC 3587 (there is no mention of this RFC on the web site). We will work on cleaning this up.

    3. IANA continues to assign /23s to RIRs (i.e., as recently as September, 2004). This is clearly too small a size, and reflects a thinking that pre-dates both RFC 3177, and the global IPv6 policy that the RIRs are currently using. For long-term support of aggregation, it is important that ISPs be allocated sufficiently large chunks, plus, RIRs must “hold back” sufficient space “in reserve” to allow an ISP’s allocation to grow in the future in such a way that its existing allocation can be expanded into a shorter prefix, rather than requiring that a new, separate allocation be made (i.e., fragementation of the address space).

      An important goal for IPv6 is to support good aggregation over long time periods (e.g., 10-20 years and beyond), so that as an ISP grows, it continues to be able to use a single prefix to aggregate all of its customers.

      We are currently studying what a more appropriate IANA-RIR allocation size is; initial discussions have suggested something in the range of /12-/16 being appropriate.

    4. The topic of IANA->RIR allocation sizes is being actively discussed within the RIR community. The expectation/plan is that each RIR will discuss the issue within its community with the eventual goal of having a single global policy that can be submitted to ICANN through the ASO. Note: it goes without saying that any such eventual recommendation should be in sync with the IETF/IAB view, so it is important that we follow/engage in these discussions as they happen.

      References:

    5. The HD Ratio is currently used to determine when an ISP has sufficiently used up a current allocation and is eligble for more address space from an RIR. (Specifically, an HD ratio of 0.8 is the current threshold.)

      At present, there is no formally defined/accepted definition of when an RIR has sufficiently “used up” an allocation it has received from IANA and becomes eligible to get more. This is a critically important topic, and the same HD ratio target is not appropriate for this. Indeed, it is unclear that the HD ratio is even an appropriate metric in this context. The issue is that in order to ensure good aggregation in the long term, RIRs must also leave their space “underutilized” or “sparsely allocated”, in order to ensure that as an ISP grows, it can get adjacent address space to its already allocated block. This emphasis on aggregation in IPv6 contrasts with the current practice in IPv4, where emphasis is weighted more heavily on address conservation.

      Further work/discussions are needed to better understand what would be good/acceptable policies/practices here. Geoff has been doing some modeling/simulation work in this space, based on data from actual IPv4 customer allocation history.

IAB ACTIONS and DOCUMENTS

    Actions

    • IDN
        Geoff Huston
        [Feb-03]
        current

        Status: Coordinate preparatory work for a possible IAB ‘virtual’ workshop on IDN and related matters

        •  Compile a list of questions to be addressed in the context of a workshop
        •  Leslie, Patrik and John Klensin to review
    • OMA Liaison
        Geoff Huston
        [Sep-03]
        closed

        Status: IAB has approved liaison with OMA

        •  Nomination of IETF liaison to OMA: Dean Willis
        •  Publish liaison document as IAB informational RFC
    • ID / Locator Architectural Consideration
        Geoff Huston
        [Jan-04]
        closed

        Status: Multi6 is working in the context of a small design team to refine wedge layer 3.5 analysis and define requires functions and components. There are architectural implications of this approach that may merit IAB study

        •  Refer to Internet Identities item (under Documents)
    • IAB Messaging Workshop
        Pete Resnick
        [Apr-04]
        current

        Status: October 6 / 7, San Francisco. Discussion topics assigned to participants, mailing list discussion underway, agenda to be prepared

        •  Archive of workshop material to be created
    • *RP protocol parameter value
        Rob Austein, Bert Wijnen
        [Apr-04]
        closed

        Status: Followup with IANA and IESG has not revealed any breakdown of the protocol parameter registration process in this instance

        •  No further action to be taken
        •  Noted that it would be useful to define a general support mechanism for the process of public requests for assignment and registration of protocol parameter values, including tracking of such request transactions.
    • IPv6 Policies
        IPv6 Advisory Committee
        [May-04]
        current

        Status: Passed a set of current IPv6 issues to the ad-hoc IAB advisory committee on IPv6 addressing issues.

        •  ip6.int, hd-ratio and IANA allocation unit
        •  Progress report noted by the IAB
    • Teredo Review
        Jonathan Rosenberg
        [Sep-03]
        current

        Status: Review the IAB Considerations section of Teredo specification

    Documents

    • A survey of Authentication Mechanisms
      draft-iab-auth-mech-03.txt

        Eric Rescorla
        [Apr-02]
        current
        Status: Revision

        1.  (current) Revise as per comments from IETF call
        2.  (next) RFC Submission
        3.  (next) still revising

    • Internationalized Resource Identifiers
      draft-iab-char-rep-01.txt

        Leslie Daigle
        [Nov-02]
        held
        Status: Hold

        1.  (current) Part of IDN workshop action

    • Secure Autoconfiguration in IPv6
        Bernard Aboba
        [Mar-03]
        current
        Status: IAB Review

        1.  (current) Propose to rework current summary as a framework description. Note original problem statement of the range of choices of discovery mechanisms.
        2.  (next) IAB Review: Rob (done), Bob, Patrik (done)
        3.  (next) publish as IAB I-D by end September

    • Protocol Models
      draft-iab-model-01.txt

        Eric Rescorla
        [May-03]
        current
        Status: Revision

        1.  (current) IAB Review: Sally (done)
        2.  (next) Incorporate review comments and publish 02 version
        3.  (next) IETF Call for Input

    • Internet Identities
      draft-iab-identities-01.txt

        Patrik Faltstrom, Geoff Huston
        [Jul-03]
        current
        Status: Revision

        1.  (current) Incorporate review comments. Reflect considerations of inter-relations of identities at different layers and impacts of making changes based on a single layer’s requirements. That revision will, in turn, reflect on the IP/locator split.

    • DOS Attacks
      draft-iab-dos-01.txt

        Mark Handley
        [Sep-03]
        current
        Status: Revision

        1.  (current) Incorporate review comments

    • Liaison Management
      draft-iab-liaison-mgmt-02.txt

        Leslie Daigle
        [Nov-03]
        current
        Status: IETF Call for Input

        1.  (current) IETF Call for Input (with draft-baker-liaison-statements-02)

    • Untangling Activeware
        Jonathan Rosenberg
        [Apr-04]
        current
        Status: Revision

        1.  (current) IAB consideration on the topic of the interaction of NATs, ALGs, Firewals, Application frameworks and IPv6 transition mechanisms
        2.  (next) Consider ways of devolving this in a manner that allows productive study of the interactions and inter-dependencies at play here
        3.  (next) Draft an abstract and outlines for further IAB review

    • Top Level Domain Issues
        Jonathan Rosenberg
        [May-04]
        current
        Status: Drafting

        1.  (current) IAB Review: Bernard, Geoff
        2.  (next) Draft publication following IAB clearance

    • Use of DNS RRs in Mail Applications
        Patrik Faltstrom, Rob Austein
        [Jun-04]
        current
        Status: Drafting

        1.  (current) draft-ymbk-dns-choices to be resubmitted as IAB draft
        2.  (next) Submit a revision to this document as an IAB draft by end September

    • Architectural Implications of Link Layer Indications
        Bernard Aboba
        [Jun-04]
        current
        Status: Drafting

        1.  (current) IAB Review: Jonathan, Sally (done – should redo after tech chat)

    • OMA Liaison Agreement
      draft-iab-oma-liaison-00.txt

        Geoff Huston
        [Sep-04]
        current
        Status: RFC Editor

        1.  (current) Submitted to RFC editor 8-Sep

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