Internet Architecture Board

RFC2850

IAB Minutes 2015-02-11

Home»Documents»Minutes»Minutes 2015»IAB Minutes 2015-02-11

Minutes of the 2015-02-11 IAB Teleconference (Business Meeting)

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

1.1. Attendance

PRESENT
  • Jari Arkko (IETF Chair)
  • Mary Barnes
  • Marc Blanchet
  • Alissa Cooper (IESG Liaison)
  • Ralph Droms (incoming IAB)
  • Mat Ford (ISOC Liaison)
  • Joel Halpern
  • Ted Hardie
  • Joe Hildebrand
  • Russ Housley (IAB Chair)
  • Xing Li
  • Cindy Morgan (IAB Executive Administrative Manager)
  • Erik Nordmark
  • Robert Sparks (incoming IAB)
  • Andrew Sullivan
  • Dave Thaler
  • Brian Trammell
  • Amy Vezza (IETF Secretariat)
  • Suzanne Woolf (incoming IAB)
REGRETS
  • Lars Eggert (IRTF Chair)
  • Heather Flanagan (RFC Editor Liaison)
  • Eliot Lear
  • Alexey Melnikov (RSOC Chair)
GUESTS
  • Michelle Cotton (IANA Liaison)
  • Jonne Soininen (ICANN Liaison)

1.2. Administrivia

Cindy Morgan noted that the BOF Coordination call for IETF 92 is scheduled for tomorrow; WebEx details were sent out on Monday.

No changes were made to the agenda.

1.3. Action Items

The internal action item list was reviewed.

1.4. Meeting Minutes

The minutes of the 4 February 2015 business meeting were approved.

The minutes of the 21 January 2015 tech chat and business meeting remain under review.

2. Welcome to Incoming IAB Members

The IAB welcomed incoming members Ralph Droms, Robert Sparks, and Suzanne Woolf.

3. Monthly Reports

3.1. ISOC Liaison Report

–Begin ISOC Liaison Report, Mat Ford–

Internet Society Liaison Report to the IAB
11 February 2015

Topics:

I. Addressing the challenge of IP spoofing
II. Internet Governance survey
III. Combating Spam project
IV. IXP assistance
V. IETF Help Desk at NANOG 63

I. Addressing the challenge of IP spoofing
The Internet Society is convening an invitation-only roundtable to 
assess the potential impact of several factors, such as measurement 
capabilities, trace back, equipment capabilities, costs, risks and 
incentives to address the challenge of IP address spoofing. The 
objective is to identify elements of a comprehensive strategy and a 
roadmap for tackling this issue.

This event will be co-located with a M3AAWG meeting, and will take place 
on 16 February, at the Palace hotel in San Francisco, US.

II. Internet Governance survey
The Internet Society is conducting a survey on Internet governance. The 
objective of this survey is to better understand how we can strengthen 
mechanisms of the Internet governance ecosystem to better address policy 
challenges in 2015. It is also designed to help ISOC contribute to the 
current discussions on the evolution of the ecosystem. Some of the 
issues include: preparations for WSIS+10; the future of the IGF; the 
appropriate role of new platforms like the NETmundial Initiative (NMI); 
and enabling a successful IANA stewardship transition.

The IAB's feedback and opinions (individually or collectively) will help 
us to understand the sentiment of the Internet technical community and 
will inform ISOC’s approach as it looks to play its role in addressing 
these issues.

The survey is available at: 
http://www.internetsociety.org/survey-internet-governance

III. Combating Spam project
The GSMA will be highlighting its partnership with the ISOC Combating 
Spam Project as part of the Ministerial Capacity Building program at the 
upcoming Mobile World Congress in Barcelona.

IV. IXP assistance
Donated equipment has been delivered in Paraguay to help develop a new 
IXP. Similar equipment has also has been sent to partners in Egypt to 
upgrade the Cairo Internet Exchange (CAIX) and to Mexico to assist in 
additional IXP build out.

ISOC staff attended an IXP launch in Bangkok along with NSRC, IIJ, 
Alcatel, Cisco, Google and local Thai Internet community experts and 
Thai government officials. This event represented the culmination of a 
two-year collaborative effort involving many colleagues.

V. IETF Help Desk at NANOG 63 in San Antonio, 2-4 February
The first ever IETF Help Desk was successfully held at NANOG 63 in San 
Antonio last week. The help desk provided a common, known point for 
operators attending the NANOG meeting to bring their questions about the 
IETF. As expected, we received many very basic questions, the most 
popular being, ‘How do I get started?’. The booth was set up for all 
three days of the NANOG meeting and was staffed by experienced IETF 
volunteers most of the time, including during all breaks. Based on this 
success we will continue with our plan to facilitate hosting of the IETF 
Help Desk at NOG/NOF meetings around the world. APRICOT 2015 in Fukuoka 
this March has confirmed and details for additional meetings are in 
progress.

Supporting links:

Operators And The IETF

http://www.internetsociety.org/deploy360/blog/2015/01/chris-grundemann-nanog-63-talking-bcop-ietf-and-more/

–End ISOC Liaison Report, Mat Ford–

3.2. IESG Liaison Report

–Begin IESG Liaison Report, Alissa Cooper–

Recent new working groups:
- 'Archive' Top-Level Media Type (arcmedia)

Recently rechartered working groups:
- None

Current new chartering:
- Domain Boundaries (dbound) [Internal review]
- Token Binding (tokbind) [Internal review]

Current rechartering:
- None

Pending rechartering:
- None

Recently closed working groups:
- Call Control UUI Service for SIP (cuss)
- SIP Overload Control (soc)
- Sip ALerting for User Devices (salud)

Personnel changes:
- Lars Eggert has stepped down as co-chair of RMCAT.

–End IESG Liaison Report, Alissa Cooper–

3.3. IRTF Chair Report

--Begin IRTF Chair Report, Lars Eggert--

- NFVRG chartered

- Am still cautiously optimistic that the CFRG has cut the Gordian knot 
  in terms of a recommendation to the TLS WG on curves.

- Ongoing discussion with ACM SIGCOMM on a SIGCOMM/IRTF workshop on 
  Internet measurements on the Saturday before the Yokohama IETF (i.e., 
  directly after ACM IMC in Tokyo).

–End IRTF Chair Report, Lars Eggert–

Dave Thaler asked if the Research Group to be reviewed at IETF 92 had been confirmed yet. Cindy Morgan recalled an earlier discussion about that back in January, but not whether there was a resolution. Cindy will follow up with Lars Eggert regarding the IRTF RG review at IETF 92.

3.4. ICANN Liaison Report

–Begin ICANN Liaison Report, Jonne Soininen–

I.  Public Comments needing attention (only highlights)
=======================================================
(All public comment processes: 
https://www.icann.org/public-comments#open-public)

IDN TLDs - LGR Procedure Implementation - Guidelines for Designing 
Script-Specific Label Generation Rules (LGR)
(https://www.icann.org/public-comments/lgr-guidelines-2015-01-15-en)
Comment period closes: 27 Feb 2015

IDN TLDs - LGR Procedure Implementation - Maximal Starting Repertoire 
Version 2
(https://www.icann.org/public-comments/msr-2014-12-15-en)

II.  Upcoming topics that could be relevant
===========================================

Continuation of the stewardship transition discussion

ICANN has now two working groups look at the transition. The first one, 
Cross Community Working Group (CWG) is chartered to develop an IANA 
stewardship transition proposal. They have published their first version 
of the document and it has received quite strong comments to it. There 
seems to be no consensus on the proposal as it stands now. The working 
group is re-looking at its proposal. This seems to take time. The CWG 
has already passed its timeline and it is not clear, which timeline 
they're able to meet.

The second working group is the Cross Community Working Group (CCWG) on 
Enhancing ICANN Accountability. The WG has started its work much later 
but seems to be coming along. They have already preliminary results 
(introducing independent review panels, possibility to recall board 
member(s), etc). The ICANN board indicated the current direction does 
look good on this level of granularity.

III.  (If relevant) upcoming meeting topics of importance
=========================================================

The ICANN meeting is ongoing in Singapore. Obviously, a large part of 
the discussion in the meeting is the IANA stewardship transition and the 
ICANN accountability. These two topics have gotten much of the focus of 
the meeting. However, the normal processes of new gTLDs are also 
progressing.

The Technical Experts Group (TEG) met also already during the ICANN 
meeting. The discussions included a presentation about Internet of 
Things from ETSI explaining that IoT may have an impact on names as 
well. In the discussion IETF's role in the IoT space was also brought up 
by the IETF TEG members. Another interesting topic was a presentation 
asking if the Internet is losing its distributed nature through a series 
of independent technical decisions including the WEIRDs and the whois 
work. This may be a topic that IAB would like to discuss among 
themselves.

–End ICANN Liaison Report, Jonne Soininen–

The IAB discussed the question of whether the Internet is losing its distributed nature. Suzanne Woolf observed that people are not thinking about the cumulative effects of concentrating things in fewer places. Jonne Soininen agreed, noting that there is an impact on the Internet architecture.

Russ Housley asked whether it was a privacy issue. Ted Hardie replied that it could be, but that it depends on the structure of the data being held.

Ted Hardie took an action item to work with Alissa Cooper and Andrew Sullivan to reach out to Joe Hall at CDT and determine if the IAB should comment on the topic as it relates to the ongoing WHOIS work.

3.5. IANA Liaison Report

–Begin IANA Liaison Report, Michelle Cotton–

IANA Liaison Report – 11 February 2015

2014 SLA Deliverables Update:

- ICANN met 99% of processing goal times for the December 2014 monthly 
  statistics, exceeding the SLA goal to meet 90% of processing goal 
  times.  These times include the steps that the IANA Department has 
  control over and not time it is waiting on requesters, document 
  authors or other experts.

- ICANN is still on target for delivering the report to the IPROC by 
  March 30, 2015.

- ICANN has submitted a revised version of the Supplemental Agreement 
  for 2015 for review by the IPROC. 

Other News:

-  The request for the addition of as112.arpa is complete.

–End IANA Liaison Report, Michelle Cotton–

Russ Housley noted that the IAOC will do the first review of the IANA SLA before running it by the IAB to mark sure the IAB has no concerns in its oversight role.

3.6. RFC Editor Liaison Report

–Begin RFC Editor Liaison Report, Heather Flanagan–

RSE Update:
RFC Format Update
The SoWs for the necessary tools are out for community comment, and
while no official comments have been received, Paul Hoffman reports that
people are asking questions and offering opinions on the xml2rfc
vocabulary that suggest people are reading the SoWs.  There have also
been quite an active set of discussions, led by Sean Leonard, on
rfc-interest.  So, the community is still engaged and offering feedback,
which is good.  One area of concern in the project, however, is the HTML
draft.  Work on that has stalled due to competing time commitments, and
finding a skilled HTML person to ensure that we have an HTML mapping for
each xml2rfc v3
vocabulary element is proving difficult.  The search for assistance will
continue, but if no one is found who is ready, willing, and able, the
next HTML draft update will be postponed until after IETF 92.

Errata System Design Team
During IETF 91, several members of the IESG offered to be a part of an
errata system design team to discuss how to make errata both more useful
to the implementer and easier to manage.  The membership list was
expanded and now includes Joel Jaeggli, Stephen Farrell, Barry Leiba,
Pete Resnick, Ted Lemon, Mark Nottingham, Nevil Brownlee, Robert Sparks,
Sandy Ginoza, and Heather Flanagan.  A wiki space is in place to record
the goals and possible models for a revised system:
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rse/wiki/doku.php?id=erratasystem:start>. 
Discussions are still in early stages, and I'm providing regular reports
to the Tools Team since it is not unlikely that this will result
(eventually) in a modification of the existing system and possibly glue
code for additional pieces (e.g., there seems to be strong support to
have future technical errata be reported into a modding system so the
community can decide what is important).  This work is interesting but
will not be prioritized above the format work.

DOI project
The DOI project was awarded last month to Standcore, with John Levine
taking lead on the development effort.  He has a copy of the RFC Editor
database and the scripts used by the RPC during their publication
process and has started reviewing that information to see exactly what
is needed to make DOI assignment and registration an automated part of
the publication process.  Regarding the administrative part of this
project, our application with CrossRef for a DOI prefix has been
accepted and our DOI prefix has been assigned: 10.17487.  This project
is scheduled to complete in April 2015.

RFC Editor website redesign
AMS was awarded the RFC Editor website redesign project last month.  The
developer on the project has started her work with updates to the queue
stats page, streamlining its functionality while also getting it set for
the new WordPress framework.  This project is scheduled to complete in
September 2015.

RPC Update:
Stats - https://www.rfc-editor.org/reports
The SLA was met in January 2015.  From the reports page: "*January
2015:* The RFC Editor is experiencing the typical surge associated with
the March IETF meeting (IESG changeover); the number of submissions has
increased significantly this month. In addition, sizable clusters were
released into the EDIT queue, e.g., weirds (C240)
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/cluster_info.php?cid=C240>, which includes 5
documents, and jose/oauth (C241)
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/cluster_info.php?cid=C241>, which includes 9
documents. "

–End RFC Editor Liaison Report, Heather Flanagan–

4. IAB Agenda at IETF 92

Russ Housley briefly ran through the IAB schedule for IETF 92.

5. Tech Plenary at IETF 92

The IAB briefly discussed the Technical Plenary for IETF 92. The topic will be smart objects, and the speakers will be Dave Thaler and Hannes Tschofenig.

Dave Thaler asked how much of the plenary time will be devoted to the technical topic. Russ Housley noted that in addition to the regular reporting, there will be the presentation of plaques to the outgoing IAB members, as well as brief updates regarding the recent IAB workshop on Stack Evolution in a Middlebox Internet (SEMI) and the IAB statement on Identifiers and Unicode 7.0.0. Russ will put together a draft agenda for the entire technical plenary and send it out to the IAB for review.

6. Internationalization Statement

The IAB agreed to revise the existing IAB Statement on Identifiers and Unicode 7.0.0 to remove the bulleted list of character sequences recommended for exclusion in any new identifiers, as the list is not complete and may be misleading. Cindy Morgan will update the statement accordingly and archive the original version.

The IAB discussed Andrew Sullivan’s proposed response to a comment received on the statement; the IAB agreed that unless anyone objects in the next day, Russ Housley will send that reply on behalf of the IAB.

7. Liaison Compensation Statement

The IAB discussed the proposed statement on Liaison compensation; the discussion will continue via email.

Mary Barnes noted that the IAB website should include a page that describes the IAB’s role in making various appointments, including those of liaison managers. Cindy Morgan will add this to the IAB’s internal action item list.

8. Joint IAB-RSSAC Statement on Liaison

The IAB approved the joint IAB-RSSAC statement on the IAB liaison to ICANN Root Server System Advisory Council (RSSAC). Marc Blanchet will send the final text (including the names of both RSSAC co-chairs) to Cindy Morgan for posting on the website.

9. NIST Revised Cryptographic Standards and Guidelines Development Process

Ted Hardie reviewed the revised Cryptographic Standards and Guidelines Development Process for the IAB, and reported that the IAB’s previous comments (see <http://www.iab.org/wp-content/IAB-uploads/2014/04/IAB- NIST7977-20140407.pdf>) have mostly been addressed. Bearing that in mind, the IAB decided that they had no further comments to make.

10. IAB Programs Overview

IAB Program Leads each gave a brief overview of their Programs in order to help the incoming IAB members decide where they would like to focus their energies.

As part of this review, the IAB noted that the Internationalization Program was listed on the website as being mostly dormant last spring; however, with the recent developments with regards to Unicode, the Program is no longer dormant. Cindy Morgan will work with Andrew Sullivan to propose updated text for the Internationalization Program web page.

Joel Halpern suggested that the IAB may be able to fold the ITU-T Coordination Program back into the Liaison Oversight Program, but further discussion was deferred until Eliot Lear could participate in the discussion.

Andrew Sullivan noted that the Name Resolution Program is still in its infancy, and does not yet have any members. Andrew will meet with Ralph Droms and Joe Hildebrand before or during IETF 92 to discuss the Program’s next steps.

11. IAB Chair Selection Process

Eliot Lear will serve as the Selection Committee Chair for the 2015-2016 IAB Chair selection process.

The IAB agreed to have a two-week nomination period.

12. Executive Session: ISOC Board of Trustees Appointments

Russ Housley recused himself from the discussion and left the teleconference. The IAB discussed the IAB appointments to the ISOC Board of Trustees in an executive session.

Cindy Morgan will send an email to the voting list to solicit volunteers to conduct candidate interviews.

12. Executive Session: Third Routing AD

Joel Halpern recused himself from the discussion and left the teleconference. In accordance with RFC 2850, Jari Arkko also departed, as did the incoming IAB members. Russ Housley returned to the teleconference.

The IAB discussed the NomCom report on the third Routing Area Director in an executive session.