Internet Architecture Board


IAB Minutes 2008-07-02

Home»Documents»Minutes»Minutes 2008»IAB Minutes 2008-07-02

Minutes IAB Teleconference 2008-07-02

1. Roll-call, agenda-bash, approval of minutes, administrivia

1.1. Agenda

1.2. Attendance


Loa Andersson
Gonzalo Camarillo
Aaron Falk (IRTF Chair)
Barry Leiba
Kurtis Lindqvist
Andy Malis
Danny McPherson
Dave Oran
Lynn St. Amour (ISOC Liaison)
Dow Street (IAB Executive Director)
Dave Thaler
Mark Townsley (IESG liaison)
Lixia Zhang


Stuart Cheshire
Sandy Ginoza (RFC Editor Liaison)
Russ Housley (IETF Chair)
Olaf Kolkman (IAB Chair)
Gregory Lebovitz

1.3 Meeting Minutes

No meeting minutes were reviewed during this call.

2. IETF 72 Planning

2.1. Overall IAB Schedule for IETF 72

Olaf walked through the IAB schedule for the Dublin meeting. It
was decided to add time on Sunday for a discussion of the IP Model
architecture topic. Dave Thaler will lead this session. The group
also added a Wednesday morning meeting for testing the Marratech
conferencing software. ISOC already uses this software, and the
IAB is considering it as an option for reducing conference call

2.2. IETF 72 Technical Plenary

Danny gave an update on preparations for the IETF 72 plenary, which
is converging to a focus on IPv6 adoption successes and barriers.
The session may also cover elements of carrier grade NATs and IPv4
address depletion (including RIR policies), though these would
likely constitute a secondary theme. The group discussed a list of
goals for the plenary and then considered potential candidates for
the technical panel. It was decided to invite 3-4 panelists with
varying perspectives to give a short talk on the topic. These
presentations would be followed by an IAB-moderated panel
discussion and Q&A session. Board members were asked to comment on
the current plan. Danny will collect comments and provide an
update next week.

3. IANA Wording Update

Danny, Kurtis, and Olaf have been coordinating with Bill Graham and
Leslie Daigle on recent correspondence with the U.S. Dept. of
Commerce. The subject of the correspondence is language within the
DoC contract with ICANN that references the IETF/IAB role in the
management of the protocol parameter registry. Danny has been
working on revised text ahead of the Dublin meeting, but it was
noted that there may not be an immediate need to push through new
language. There were no specific inputs from the rest of the IAB.
Danny will give another update at the next business meeting.

4. IAB Liaison Shepherds

There was a brief discussion of the updated liaison shepherd role
description and the current list of IAB shepherd-liaison pairings.
The plan requires IAB shepherds to communicate with their liaisons
at least once each month, assist in liaison activities (as needed),
get periodic reports from the liaison (e.g. prior to an IETF
meeting), and provide a short update bi-annually to the entire IAB
on the overall status of the liaison relationship. The group also
decided that it would be worthwhile to develop an internal list
of informal affiliations with outside organizations. The purpose
of this list would be to assist board members in locating other
members (or external individuals) who have existing relationships
and/or participation with other SDOs.

5. IP Host Configuration Document Review / Status

Dave Thaler reported that he had gotten some feedback on the draft,
and that the main addition to the last version was new text on
dual-homed nodes (Danny’s comments). In this area, the draft
attempts to generalize functionality of dual-stack nodes, and
references the DHCP-specific RFC as needed. It was decided to
begin an IETF call for comments sometime next week. Dave will
send an email to the IAB list with a link to the latest draft,
which is currently hosted on Bernard’s server.

6. NAT-PT / IESG Update

Mark gave an update on NAT-PT and recent discussions within the
IESG. It appears that the IESG may be heading down a path that
leans on DNS rather than requiring host changes. This direction
differs from earlier IAB thinking as was outlined in Elwyn’s slides
from the Sept IAB meeting. Dave Thaler noted that there does not
appear to be community consensus on a preferred approach.

Mark had sent out an email with a strawman proposal, to which Dave
suggested added some introductory material with additional context.
There is something of an analogy to the IESG approach to the
routing scalability problem, where the problem was divided into
nearer term IETF work and longer term IRTF work, but that this
context was missing in Mark’s existing email. The group walked
through the Elwyn’s slides. There are a variety of sub-cases in
this problem space, and Mark indicated that the current IESG plan
looks to consider out of scope those cases involving IPv4
origination or requiring host changes. Lixia re-phrased the
situation as “there may be simple solutions that cover 90% of
the problem – is it worth the effort to tackle the remaining open

It was decided to add text to Mark’s email that identifies dual-
stack as the preferred approach, suggests proceeding with v6-v4
translation for supporting v6 only islands, and defers the case of
v4 hosts originating sessions to a v6 server. Mark will write a
draft email and send it to the IAB for review prior to mailing it
to the larger community. IAB members were requested to provide
Mark with timely feedback on the proposed text.

7. Action Item Status

7.1. Unwanted Traffic RG

Danny reported that the IAB-specific work on this topic is closed
for now, but that steady, ongoing work is likely outside the IAB.
There is an IAB draft that has been circulating, but there is no
immediate deadline for publication. The IAB will revisit this
document after the next IETF meeting. It was noted that the IAB
effort in this area had helped to drive a successful investigation
of the issues, and that much of the space now lies within the scope
of the IRTF Anti-spam Research Group (ASRG) and the OPS Area of the

7.2. Anycast

Oran is working on comments.

7.3. Discussion on Infrastructure ENUM Document

No update.

7.4. ICANN NomCom

No update.

8. Document Status

8.1. What Makes for a Successful Protocol

This document is with the RFC Editor.

8.2. Principles of Internet Host Configuration

Dave Thaler noted that there is one more week for IAB review of
this document before submission. He will confirm that Lixia’s
latest comments have been incorporated and will send out email to
the group.

8.3. Design Choices When Expanding DNS

Dave Thaler reported that there were some recent tests to determine
current server behavior for various record types. He just recently
sent the test results to Olaf, who will determine if/how they
impact the current draft.

8.4. DNS Synthesis Concerns

This document is also on Olaf’s plate. Danny recently sent Olaf
comments, and noted that the area is getting more exposure as of
late due to cross-domain scripting. It was agreed that there would
be value in the IAB publishing this document.

8.5. A Survey of Authentication Mechanisms

Danny reported that he had an updated version of this document, and
that the plan was for Gregory to take over as editor when he
returns from vacation. Eric Rescorla and Bernard Aboba have also
been assisting, and had previously worked on the document while on
the IAB.

8.6. Headers and Boilerplates

The IAB Stream header needs to be added to this document, and there
may be some relation between this draft and the errata draft.
Danny will coordinate with Russ and Olaf on the matter.

9. AOB

Barry noted the recent comments at the Philadelphia plenary about
the increasing number of DISCUSSes being originated by the IESG.
These comments prompted a number of side conversations, and Barry
asked if the subject was discussed at the IESG plenary. Loa and
Mark indicated that the IESG is indeed continuing a discussion on
the use of DISCUSSes. Barry asked if it was appropriate for the
IAB to approach the IESG on the matter in order to initiate a
conversation. It was suggested that the current time might be
less than ideal for raising this issue due to the pending appeal.
There was also agreement that the IAB does not want to be seen as
directing the actions of the IESG. No specific next steps on the
matter were identified.

10. Conclude Call