October 12, 2005
- Rollcall, Agenda Bash and Previous Minutes
- Review of Action Items
- Review of Documents
- Regular Reports
- IPv6 Ad Hoc committee — recharter
- Liaison work
- IAB job description for the NomCom
- Comment on ICANN Revised IDN Guidelines?
- IAB architecture external
- Workshop plan
- Upcoming IAB meetings
Leslie Daigle — IAB Chair
Brian Carpenter — IETF Chair
Rich Draves — IAB Executive Director
Aaron Falk — IRTF Chair
Joyce K. Reynolds — Liaison from the RFC Editor
Lynn St. Amour — Liaison from ISOC
Bert Wijnen — Liaison from the IESG
1.3 Previous Minutes
Minutes from September were accepted.
(See Appendix A)
(See Appendix B)
Lynn St. Amour
- IAB ISOC Technical Communications Committee
Following on from an Action item from the September IAB meeting – Pete Resnick and I discussed the next steps and will be holding a meeting to:
- Identify upcoming hot topics (and identify “experts”) as the first step in preparing the technical briefing notes
- Discussion of other ISOC publications as appropriate to complete the picture.
- Reminder that the next ISOC Board of Trustees meeting will be held on Sunday October 30th in Dulles, Virginia. It is an open meeting and all are welcome.
- WSIS update from PrepCom 3
Progress was slow on all chapters of the proposed WSIS final document and the main sticking points are with respect to possible oversight structures and the role of Governments in areas of Internet Governance. A good resource for all formal WSIS documents can be found at:
and ISOC position can be found at:
As PrepCom 3 was not able to close on key issues, several additional sessions have been scheduled between now and the formal Summit in Tunis in November 2005.
RFC Editor Report
Joyce K. Reynolds
- New NEWS item on RFC Editor web site:
6 October 2005
On September 27, the RFC Editor installed a program to automatically generate the publication queue file daily from our master database. The queue file had been maintained manually, which sometimes led to errors. Our intent in this change was that users should see no differences (except for lack of errors), but of course there were some initial glitches. Please notify us of problems with the new queue.
One feature has been added to the queue: each normative reference entry (“REF”) now indicates whether the referenced document is in the queue. Our current policy is to not begin editing a document until all its normative references are also in the queue (or already published, of course). For example, the following partial entry shows a document in the EDIT state with two unpublished Normative references, one of which has not been received by the RFC Editor:
2005-03-31 draft-ietf-simple-event-filter-funct-05.txt EDIT REF draft-ietf-simple-event-list NOT-RECEIVED draft-ietf-simple-filter-format IN-QUEUE
- The "TLG" folks held a conference call last Friday, October 7, to go over RFC Editor operations. All TLG members were in attendance: Joyce Reynolds, Bob Braden, Aaron Falk, Leslie Daigle, Brian Carpenter, Lynn St. Amour, and Ray Pelletier.
- We are continuing to work with Bill Fenner on issues between the IESG’s Datatracker compared with RFC-Editor Queue.
Bert Wijnen and David Meyer
- The IESG has decided that it makes sense to create a new AREA: Real Time Applications and Infrastructure Area (RAI). Announcement has gone out to IETF-announce and NomCOm has been informed that two new ADs need to appointed for this new Area, one for a 1-year term and one for a 2-year term.
- The IESG has also decided that it will review its own processes for efficiency in the coming months. This is a direct result from the discussions about the formation of the new Area and the idea of adding a 3rd INT AD (which the IESG decided against).
- As reported last month, the IESG had received 2 appeals, both on senderid. The IESG has requested independent expert advice w.r.t. the anomalous Resent-* behavior, but has not yet received any, so we’re contemplating how to proceed on the appeals.
- David Kessens has issued a 4-week IETF Last Call for a PR-action (as per RFC 3683) against Dean Anderson after we (IESG) got a request from Dave Crocker to do so and after we (IESG) agreed that such an IETF Last Call makes sense. David had volunteerd to “shepherd” the request.
- Another request for a PR-action (as per RFC 3683) has been requested by Harald Alvestrand. This one is against Jefsey Morfin. The IESG still needs to discuss this request. Scott Hollenbeck has volunteered to “shepherd” this request.
- There was some internal IESG/IAB concerns about a possible or perceived conflict-of-interest if Brian was to be the hosting AD for the PESCI-BOF, since it is Brian (in his role as IETF chair) who convened and selected the PESCI team. The issue has been resolved by making Bert and Sam the joint-hosting ADs for that specific BOF.
- To end on a positive note, here are some statistics on productivity of the IESG over the last 3 months.
Bill Fenner writes: I guess we were really productive in September:
+------------+-----------------------+----------+-----------------------+ | Month | Publication Requested | Approved | Both within the month | +------------+-----------------------+----------+-----------------------+ | 2005-07-01 | 33 | 17 | 0 | | 2005-08-01 | 30 | 18 | 0 | | 2005-09-01 | 23 | 43 | 2 | +------------+-----------------------+----------+-----------------------+
Bill produced these manually from the database(s). If we think this is useful for our monthly report to IAB, then maybe we should ask Bill if he can make a public interface, so everyone can see the numbers at any time they want.
- Had conference call with several folks from the XCAST community interested in a research group for large numbers of small multicast groups. They’ve been asked to identify the problem they are solving that isn’t solved by IP multicast or multicast overlays.
- Some bad mail list behavior on the CFRG list is motivating adaptation of the IETF mail list guidelines to the IRTF. I’d like to form an ad-hoc committee out of the IAB and IRSG to review this.
- Actively soliciting potential co-chairs for the congestion control research group.
- Dan Massey, University of Colorado, will be the new co-chair of the Routing Research Group (RRG), along with Avri Doria.
- The RRG will be conducting an RG review with the IAB at the Vancouver IETF.
- The IRSG discussed and is converging on a request for a small number of rooms (~3) for IRTF RGs to meet on Friday afternoon to take advantage of longer sessions and no working group conflicts. Not all RGs meeting at IETF would take advantage of this.
ITU-T NGN Report
A corrigendum for last month’s report:
Y.1414 is not just voice over MPLS with AAL2. Y.1414 contains three modes, 2 of them based on MPLS PWs. The voice over MPLS with AAL2 mode WAS given a PW type in the PWE3 IANA document. It was the OTHER mode, the "MPLS forum" mode that did not receive a code point due to lack of use.
During the last two months, we’ve had a substantial amount of traffic between OMA and IETF, including a chairs-and-liaisons meeting to update the OMA-IETF dependency list, which is maintained at:
OMA has a number of critical dependencies being progressed in SIMPLE and SIP, notably Presence and XCAP-related documents and some SIP extensions needed for the OMA Push-to-Talk over Cellular specification.
http://www.iab.org/liaisons/oma/2005-10-07.html for the full report.)
The IAB reviewed the proposed new charter for its ad hoc committee on address allocation (aka the "IAB IPv6 ad hoc committee"). Briefly, the group is expected to serve as a venue for the IAB to ask for advice or input on addressing-related issues, serve as a "design team" for housing discussions related to topics under development, and follow and identify topics being discussed within the RIR community that may warrant review or discussion in the IETF. The current members are Kurtis Lindqvist (chair), Geoff Huston, Bob Hinden, David Kessens, Brian Haberman, Thomas Narten, Paul Wilson, and Leslie Daigle.
The IAB discussed whether this is properly an IAB activity. Some questioned how much input the IAB has into these issues. Others pointed out that historically the IAB has fielded queries from IANA in this space, and that it’s important for the IAB to have a direct view of these operational issues.
The IAB agreed that the charters for its active ad hoc committees should be publically available. Rich took the action of preparing web pages for review and approval by the IAB prior to publication.
The IAB discussed strategies for finding a new MFA liaison. Loa agreed to take the action. Leslie agreed to send a note to Andy Malis expressing the IAB’s intention to find a new liaison manager to remove concerns about potential for perceptions of conflict between his roles as President of the MFA Forum and IETF liaison to the forum.
The IAB discussed draft-andersson-iab-liaison-guidelines-00 and agreed to make it an IAB document.
The IAB discussed appointing a liaison to ITU-T SG 15. The IAB agreed to appoint Adrian Farrell, as liaison representative under the supervision of Scott Bradner as liaison manager for ITU.
The IAB discussed revisions to its job description, to be passed to the NomCom via the IETF Executive Director. The IAB agreed to the current text with some final minor edits.
The IAB discussed a proposed response to ICANN’s solicitation of comments on its draft revised Guidelines for the Implementation of Internationalized Domain Names. (See
http://icann.org/announcements/announcement-20sep05.htm.) The IAB agreed to ship the response. (See
The IAB discussed the pending announcement of its architecture-discuss list. The IAB agreed it would be desirable to have a short write-up of sample topics, to kickstart discussions. Pekka agreed to supply this.
The IAB discussed Pekka’s draft revision of the IAB architectural issues web page (
http://www.iab.org/documents/resources/architectural-issues.html). The IAB agreed that some form of interactivity would be useful and discussed blogs and wikis. A wiki with an RSS feed had some support. Rich took the action of investigating whether the IAB’s private web server can also support a public interactive space.
The IAB discussed how to move forward on the proposal to hold a workshop on mechanisms for dealing with bad traffic. Pekka said he won’t have time to move forward on planning until after Vancouver. The IAB agreed on the necessity of a point person to move forward quickly. Rich volunteered to assist Pekka with planning. Pete volunteered to give Rich the benefit of his experience with planning IAB workshops.
The IAB discussed potential IRTF research groups for its customary review at IETF. The IAB agreed to review RRG at its Thursday breakfast meeting.
The IAB discussed potential technical topics for its plenary. The IAB agreed to ask David McGrew to give a talk on the CFRG’s work on hashing, with MobOpts as a backup plan.
The IAB discussed the idea of a "debate" for its Sunday afternoon meeting at IETF. The IAB agreed to debate protocol complexity, not to decide a winner or loser but to explore the issues. Leslie took the action of framing the debate proposition and ground rules.
It was suggested that a debriefing after the IAB-sponsored BOF on IPv6 multi-homing at NANOG 35 (see http://www.iab.org/documents/open-mtgs) would be interesting to the IESG as well as the IAB. Leslie took the action of discussing this with Brian as a possible topic for the joint IESG/IAB lunch on Sunday at IETF.
The IAB discussed having more frequent teleconferences. The main motivation for this is to maintain momentum for the IAB’s work, instead of having a monthly burst of activity prior to each teleconference. The IAB agreed to try two business-meeting teleconferences per month, reducing the time per meeting to 90 minutes. Leslie took action of sending email with a specific plan for November and following months.
The IAB discussed its October 26 tech chat. Eric volunteered to propose something fairly basic in security, to get folks up to speed on the issues.
Scope of IETF Architecture
Dave Meyer, Allison Mankin
Initiated: August 2005
Goal: Create an effort to develop a statement of the scope of the IETF architecture.
Old Status: No progress. I will turn up the priority with Allison.
New Status: No progress.
Guidelines for IETF Liaisons
Initiated: June 2005
Goal: Describe IETF liaison relationship to other organizations.
Old Status: Loa circulated another revision, spurring more discussion.
IESG Concerns Regarding RFC Processing
Brian Carpenter, Leslie Daigle
Initiated: May 2005
Goal: Resolve concerns regarding lack of visibility into RFC Editor state, copy-editing, and excessive author changes in AUTH48. Gather feedback from community.
Old Status: Making progress on establishing and running an experiment with the copy-editing at a different point in the document creation/approval cycle (see IESG report).
New Status: The experiment continues. The techspec BOF is scheduled and draft-mankin-pub-req-00.txt is published.
IDN Ad Hoc
Patrik Fältström, Pete Resnick
Initiated: March 2005
Goal: Create a mailing list and initiate discussion for IAB ad hoc committee on Internationalized Domain Names.
Old Status: Face-2-face meeting at IETF 63. Outline of report created by Patrik and John Klensin.
New Status: Summary proposed by Leslie and Patrik and sent to IAB list. The summary divides the problem between what the IETF can do and what ICANN can do.
IPv6AD Hoc Advisory Committee
Initiated: May 2004
Goal: Passed a set of current IPv6 issues to the ad-hoc IAB advisory committee on IPv6 addressing issues: ip6.int deprecation, hd-ratio considerations, minimum IANA IPv6 allocation unit, IANA IPv6 registry terminology and format
Old Status: IAB should discuss in business meeting.
New Status: Done, anything remaining is rolled up into recharter.
Initiated: April 2005
Goal: Revise/maintain the list of architectural issues on the IAB web pages.
Old Status: Issues and principles collected during Paris meeting. Pekka working on organising the material, Dave helping. Initial draft for new organisation expected in September 2005.
New Status: Initial draft for new organisation ready. Waiting for comments on that from both IAB and IESG. Continuing to fill in actual data. First revision of data pages expected in late November/ December.
RFC Editor Copyright
Leslie Daigle, Brian Carpenter
Initiated: November 2004
Goal: Pass RFC Editor Copyright provisions to IETF legal counsel for review with respect to permissions relating to protection of IETF interests, integrity of the IETF Standards Track documents for derivative works and relation to any third party interests in the material published by the RFC Editor.
Old Status: It appears that the RFC Editor has not updated their web site.
New Status: Was discussed on call with RFC Editor team on October 7 and we believe they will now look at the issue and discuss with Jorge Contreras.
Research Note document proposal
Initiated: November 2004
Goal: Convene a group consisting of Vern Paxson, Brian Carpenter, Aaron Falk, and Leslie Daigle, assisted by Sally Floyd and Mark Handley to document this proposal and highlight related considerations for the IAB.
Old Status: discussed topic at IAB breakfast in Paris and on mailing list afterwards. It appears that different people want special IRTF track publications to address different perceived problems.
New Status: no progress
ISOC BoT Selection
Rich Draves, Leslie Daigle
Initiated: November 2004
Goal: Before the next round, review the RFC 3677 process. Leslie will circulate list of issues to IAB/IESG/IAOC.
Old Status: Pete Resnick leading the drafting of email to IETF community on this subject; circulated a revised draft on 1 Sep. And Leslie will provide a further revised version for review.
New Status: We did circulate the question on the IETF list. There was very little discussion, certainly nothing conclusive. My interpretation is to declare the issue publicly dealt with and leave the documents alone.
Proposed Congestion Control RG
Initiated: January 2005
Goal: Consult with ADs on the potential role for such a RG
Old Status: Stalled pending finding an appropriate co-chair.
New Status: Aaron is contacting some potential co-chairs.
A survey of Authentication Mechanisms
Initiated: April 2002
Old Status: Some internal progress, no externally visible progress.
New Status: New version submitted. Some comments received from Pekka. BRC says he’s going to send comments. Waiting on that.
Internationalized Resource Identifiers
Initiated: November 2002
Old Status: No progress
New Status: No progress
Patrik Fältström, Leslie Daigle
Initiated: July 2003
Old Status: Leslie is making progress on drafting comments (on the specific document text + proposed purpose).
New Status: Leslie’s comments are in. The next step is for the IAB to figure out what the heck to *do* with this document. No volunteers to move this forward, so IAB agreed to take the document off its agenda.
Initiated: September 2003
Old Status: Collecting/integrating input from Lixia and Dave.
New Status: New version submitted. Ready for IETF Call For Input?
Initiated: April 2004
Old Status: No change. Actually, the -00 expired. I’d like to resubmit with no change in content to keep it on the site until I can do a real revision.
New Status: Update in progress, targeting for Vancouver. The IAB gave Jonathan permission to revise and submit a revision at the last minute.
IAB Messaging Workshop
Initiated: April 2004
Old Status: draft-iab-messaging-report-00 available. Awaiting comments. (Very few received so far.) Editing pass, and then will submit for RFC.
New Status: The IAB agreed to submit this to the RFC Editor.
Top Level Domain Issues
Initiated: May 2004
Old Status: Submitted to the RFC Editor.
New Status: In RFC Editor queue.
Design Choices When Expanding DNS
Initiated: June 2004
Old Status: Patrik says many comments, discussion of ease of registering new RR types. Document needs revision to incorporate details.
New Status: No progress. I discussed with Pekka what is to be added (how to register rr types). We (IAB) must ignore some people’s complaints. The IAB agreed to add a note to the document acknowledging the concerns.
Architectural Implications of Link Layer Indications
Initiated: June 2004
Old Status: Revision submitted (-03) incorporating outstanding comments. Are we ready to publish?
New Status: Comments are being received on -03. Revision in progress.
IAOC Selection Procedure
Initiated: December 2004
Old Status: New revision has been posted. Brian now to put it on IESG agenda.
New Status: Approved for publication by the IESG.
Leslie Daigle, Aaron Falk
Initiated: December 2004
Old Status: Aaron still waiting for Dave’s comments, then IETF Last Call to make it an IAB informational document.
New Status: The document is ready to send to the RFC Editor. Bert will send the IESG a pointer for heads-up and courtesy review.
IEEE 802 / IETF Relationship
Loa Andersson, Bernard Aboba
Initiated: June 2005
Old Status: -01 submitted. So far, no IAB/IESG review comments. What next?
New Status: IESG review has been completed. Discussion on Int-Area mailing list revealed an issue relating to use of the term “member” as applied to the IETF. Scott Bradner recommends substituting “participant”. -02 draft submitted, some gremlins found (inappropriate characters). Next step: review by IEEE 802 ExComm. The IAB agreed that the document does not need wider IETF review. We will take IEEE changes and then have IAB/IESG review again.
Remaining Issues with the Core IPv6 Protocols
(waiting for -00 draft)
Initiated: July 2005
Old Status: This one is slow going, but I’ll up the priorty. Bob and Kurtis are helping out.
New Status: This one is slow going, but I’ll up the priorty. Bob and Kurtis are helping out. Dave agreed to summarize the purpose of the document to the IAB list.
Mobility Principles (working name)
(waiting for -00 draft)
Initiated: August 2005
Old Status: Work started, -00 version expected late September / early October 2005.
New Status: No change. [Starting to put together on next week, hope to hit -00 deadline as a personal draft.]
Initiated: October 2005
New Status: A first draft has been prepared. I’ve received comments from Pekka. Should this document be subsumed into a larger “bulge at the waist” document, or should it become an IAB document on its own? The IAB decided to review the document prior to deciding if it should be an IAB document. In the meantime, Bernard should submit it as an individual draft. Eric volunteered to review it for the IAB.
The IAB Web page is at http://www.iab.org