Internet Architecture Board

RFC2850

IAB Minutes 2015-03-11

Home»Documents»Minutes»Minutes 2015»IAB Minutes 2015-03-11

Minutes of the 2015-03-11 IAB Teleconference (Business Meeting)

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

1.1. Attendance

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

1.2. Administrivia

Items on “Additional Transparency on IAB statements” and “Meeting with U.S. Government Accountability Office” were added to the agenda.

1.3. Action item review

The internal action item list was reviewed.

1.4. Meeting Minutes

The minutes of the 4 March 2015 IAB business meeting were approved.

2. Monthly Reports

2.1. ISOC Liaison Report

–Begin ISOC Liaison Report, Mat Ford–

Internet Society Liaison Report to the IAB
11 March 2015

Topics:

 I. Addressing the challenge of IP spoofing
II. W3C Privacy Interest Group (PING)
III. ICANN 52 DNSSEC Workshop
IV. IXP Activities
 V. African Peering and Interconnection Forum (AfPIF) 2015
VI. APRICOT 2015
VII. WSIS / UNESCO Connecting the dots conference (3-4 March, Paris)

I. Addressing the challenge of IP spoofing
The Internet Society convened an invitation-only roundtable meeting 
focused on the source IP address spoofing problem. It took place on 16 
February, at the Palace hotel in San Francisco, USA, co-located with the 
33rd M3AAWG meeting.

The participants had productive discussions of the following focus 
areas:
	- Measurements
	- Traceability
	- Operational practices and major contributors
	- Capacity and deployment considerations
	- Incentives, communication and awareness

A summary of these discussions and major takeaways will be published in 
a report. We hope that the report will be a useful tool for focusing 
community efforts in addressing this complex problem.

II. W3C Privacy Interest Group (PING)
PING held its monthly call on 26 February 2015. This call focused on 
personas and WebRTC local IP address disclosure, but also covered the 
recent TAG finding “Securing the Web” [1] and related work in the Web 
Applications Security Working Group. The draft Fingerprinting Guidance 
for Web Specification Authors [2] has been updated. Feedback is welcome.

PING will be holding an informal face-to-face meeting alongside IETF 92 
on Thursday 26 March 2015 (11:30 - 13:00) in Vista. This is an open 
meeting: IAB members and IETF participants with an interest in Web 
privacy are welcome to attend. Meeting details will be posted on the 
public-privacy@w3c.org email list.

[1] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/web-https
[2] http://w3c.github.io/fingerprinting-guidance/

Link to call summary: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-
privacy/2015JanMar/0107.html

III. ICANN 52 DNSSEC Workshop
The Internet Society Deploy360 Programme worked with ICANN's SSAC to 
produce a very successful DNSSEC Workshop at ICANN 52. Around 100 people 
participated in Singapore with another 25 or so joining in remotely. 
Topics included case studies of DNSSEC deployment around the Asia 
Pacific Region, DNSSEC for reverse DNS zones, demonstrations of 
applications using the DANE protocol and a lengthy discussion of 
challenges faced by DNS operators in providing large-scale DNSSEC-
signing services. Information and slides can be found at: 
http://singapore52.icann.org/en/schedule/wed-dnssec Planning is now 
underway for the next DNSSEC Workshop at ICANN 53 in Buenos Aires and 
the Call For Participation has been published.

IV. IXP Capacity Building
ISOC partnered with RIPE, France-IX, INEX, NIX.CZ, the ITU, the 
University of Podgorica, and Montenegran government officials to hold an 
IXP workshop in Zabljak, Montenegro. Montenegro plans to locate an IXP 
at the University of Podgorica’s facilities. This is the second of two 
workshops held to help develop an IX in this country. This month, thanks 
to a grant from Cisco, the team also shipped equipment to Mexico to 
develop its IXP network.

V. African Peering and Interconnection Forum (AfPIF) 2015
The sixth AfPIF will be held in Mozambique from 25-27 August 2015, in 
partnership with the Eduardo Mondlane University Computing Center 
(CIUEM). The event draws IXP managers and operators, network operators, 
and content delivery network providers.

See: http://www.internetsociety.org/news/internet-society-brings-
african-interconnection-conference-mozambique

VI. APRICOT 2015
The second IETF Help Desk was successfully provided at APRICOT 2015 in 
Fukuoka [1]. While the effort reached many attendees, we did receive 
less traffic than at NANOG last month. This is likely due to a less 
condensed venue (the meeting was spread across 4 floors of a convention 
center), less optimal placement of the desk (partly due to the former, 
partly due to sponsor booths taking up the best locations), and the fact 
that there was no plenary talk about the help desk this time (the agenda 
was largely multi-track). We plan to continue work with APRICOT 
organizers to earn more support from the event in the future.

There was also an ‘Operators and the IETF’ BoF, which generated a good 
discussion of the issues at hand and generated large interest in the 
IETF from those attending. Notes taken during the meeting will inform 
future versions of the Operators and the IETF Internet-Draft [2].

[1] http://www.internetsociety.org/deploy360/blog/2015/02/chris-
grundemann-apricot-2015-ietf-bcop/
[2] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-opsawg-operators-ietf

VII. WSIS / UNESCO Connecting the dots conference (3-4 March, Paris)
300 delegates gathered last week in Paris to discuss options for UNESCO 
in implementing the WSIS targets, beyond 2015. The debate focused on how 
the Internet affects access to information and knowledge, freedom of 
expression, and also how our personal information is collected and 
processed. A final outcome document was agreed by all stakeholders, 
recognizing the value of open governance models, such as the IGF, and 
recognizing that human rights are enablers to sustainable development 
goals. Constance Bommelaer co-lead the multistakeholder drafting group 
along with APC, Disney and a few governmental representatives. The 
output document will feed into the WSIS Review, in December 2015. For 
further information, see our blogpost [1].

The UNESCO meeting is one in a series of events in 2015 that will form 
the foundation of the WSIS Review at the end of 2015. The WSIS Review 
will be hosted in New York by the United Nations General Assembly and 
will evaluate the progress made by the international community toward 
implementing the 2005 WSIS outcomes (Tunis Agenda). We can expect this 
high level meeting to focus on some key areas: security, surveillance, & 
privacy; ICTs and sustainable development; institutional arrangements 
for Internet governance.

The Internet governance discussion will look at the role of the United 
Nations and its various agencies (ITU, UNESCO, etc) in the Internet 
space - the renewal of the IGF is likely to come up in that context. In 
addition, we can expect that the status and timeline of the IANA 
transition will impact the debate among governments in the WSIS review.

[1] http://www.internetsociety.org/blog/public-policy/2015/03/
connecting-dots-options-future-action

–End ISOC Liaison Report, Mat Ford–

2.2. IESG Liaison Report

–Begin IESG Liaison Report, Alia Atlas–

Recent new working groups:
- Token Binding (tokbind)
- Bit Indexed Explicit Replication (bier)
- 'Archive' Top-Level Media Type (arcmedia)

Recently rechartered working groups:
- Routing Area Working Group (rtgwg)

Current new chartering:
- L3VPN Service Model (l3sm) [External Review]
- Domain Boundaries (dbound) [External Review]

Current rechartering:
- TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions (tcpm)  [Internal Review]
- Interface to the Routing System (i2rs)   [Internal Review]

Pending rechartering:
- None

Recently closed working groups:
- None

Personnel changes:
- Chris Bowers replaces Alvaro Retana as co-chair of the rtgwg WG.
- Bruno Decraene replaces Alvaro Retana as co-chair of the spring WG.
- Pavan Beeram replaces Deborah Brungard as co-chair of the teas WG.

–End IESG Liaison Report, Alia Atlas–

2.3. IRTF Chair Report

–Begin IRTF Chair Report, Lars Eggert–

- CFRG making slow but steady progress on their recommendation to TLS 
  and W3C.

- Thing-to-Thing Research Group (T2TRG) proposed, meeting in Dallas

- Human Rights Protocol Considerations Research Group (HRPC) proposed, 
  meeting in Dallas

- 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–

Lars Eggert added that IAB members may be contacted by members of the Human Rights Protocol Considerations Research Group (HRPC) who are trying to schedule interviews; IAB members should feel free to ask for more information from the HRPC.

2.4. 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)
Comment period closes: 16 Mar 2015

Reference Label Generation Rulesets (LGRs) for the Second Level
(https://www.icann.org/public-comments/lgr-second-level-2015-03-10-en)
Comment period closes: 19 April 2015

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

Continuation of the stewardship transition discussion

The main topic in ICANN continues to be the IANA stewardship transition. 
The two cross-community working groups are continuing their work - the 
IANA transition working group (CWG) and the ICANN accountability working 
group (CCWG). The CCWG continues to make more headway than the CWG, 
which is still continuing to find its way in creating the working 
practices and processes of the WG. The WG has created some 11 design 
teams to accelerate the progress of the CWG. In addition, there is a 
client committee whose job is to to find independent legal advice for 
the CWG. The client committee has recently chosen a law firm to provide 
that advice - Sidley Austin LLP.

A major event was a senate hearing on the IANA transition held in 
Washington, DC, US on February 25th (http://www.commerce.senate.gov/
public/index.cfm?p=Hearings&ContentRecord_id=683924ae-83d7-4bf4-922a-
cdecb9556ba9&ContentType_id=14f995b9-
dfa5-407a-9d35-56cc7152a7ed&Group_id=b06c39af-e033-4cba-9221-
de668ca1978a). The hearing went well and it seems the question is not if 
the transition will happen, but how it will happen. This is good news 
for the Internet.

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

CWG and CCWG are going to hold a face-to-face meeting in Istanbul, 
Turkey on March 23-27th (https://community.icann.org/pages/
viewpage.action?pageId=52890325, https://community.icann.org/display/
acctcrosscomm/In+Person+Attendees). Sadly, this happens to be during the 
Dallas IETF meeting.

–End ICANN Liaison Report, Jonne Soininen–

Dave Thaler noted that the open public comment period for “IDN TLDs – LGR Procedure Implementation – Maximal Starting Repertoire Version 2″ may be of interest to the Internationalization Program. Andrew Sullivan will make sure that the details are forwarded to the Program.

2.5. IANA Liaison Report

–Begin IANA Liaison Report, Michelle Cotton–

IANA Liaison Report – 11 March 2015

2014 SLA Deliverables Update:

- ICANN met 98% of processing goal times for the January 2015 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 Review of Protocol 
  Parameters report to the IPROC by March 30, 2015.  This report is a 
  deliverable outlined in the 2014 SLA.

- ICANN is currently reviewing the most recent revisions to the draft 
  version of the Supplemental Agreement for 2015.  Final review and 
  approval is expected to be completed by the end of March.

Other News:

- ICANN received a Documentary Information Disclosure request for a copy 
  of the Plan for Transition to Successor Contractor per Section C.7.3 
  of the IANA Functions Contract.  ICANN reviewed the request and 
  received approval to publish the requested document.  The document is 
  posted here: http://iana.org/about/framework

–End IANA Liaison Report, Michelle Cotton–

Andrew Sullivan will make sure that the details about the Documentary Information Disclosure request are forwarded to the IANA Evolution Program.

2.6. RFC Editor Liaison Report

–Begin RFC Editor Liaison Report, Heather Flanagan–

RSE Update:

RFC Format
The project is currently blocked on the update of the HTML draft.  What
is needed at this point is to ensure that there is an HTML mapping for
each xml2rfc v3 vocabulary element. Joe Hildebrand has a tool that has
been used to test the xml2rfc v3 and corresponding HTML output, but
additional work is required.  This may not see progress until April
2015. All other drafts are essentially stable; any additional updates
can be considered tweaks and enhancements to the information in the I-Ds.

Errata System Design Team
This team is on hold until after IETF 92 and the corresponding IESG
changeover, as many of the members of the team are outgoing IESG members.

DOI project
The project is on schedule to complete by 1 May 2015.  The vendor is
working with the RPC on initial script handover and database updates,
and is in discussion regarding how to update the bibxml2 reference
library.

RFC Editor website redesign
The project is on schedule to complete by 30 September 2015.  The vendor
has the theme and scripts in place, though some testing needs to happen
to verify the navigation works as expected.  Additional work is required
to further update and transition the dynamic content and make sure it
matches the overall look and feel of the new website.

Discouraging Sponsor as Author
The RSE and the RSOC are working on an official statement making clear
that a sponsor who is funding a contractor to work on an RFC may not be
included as an author.  This will be discussed further on the RSOC call
on 11 March 2015.

RPC Update:
Stats - https://www.rfc-editor.org/reports
The SLA was not met in February due to the expected annual surge of
documents into the RFC Editor queue.  While not as high as last year's
surge, the surge is significant:

		2013 	  	2014 	  	2015 	
		Jan 	Feb 	Jan 	Feb 	Jan 	Feb
Sub		34 	22 	46 	48 	44 	32
moved to EDIT	30 	23 	51 	67 	47 	36

March is also looking to be a high submission month, with 20 documents
submitted as of March 10 (as a comparison, in 2013 March saw 29
documents entering EDIT during that entire month, and 2014 March saw
35 documents enter EDIT).

–End RFC Editor Liaison Report, Heather Flanagan–

3. IAB Agenda at IETF 92

The IAB discussed their agenda for IETF 92. Dave Thaler noted that there is a side meeting that may be of interest to some IAB members on “How Ossified is the Protocol Stack” that came out of discussions at the SEMI workshop. Brian Trammell will send the details out to the IAB.

4. Technical Plenary at IETF 92

The IAB discussed the Technical Plenary at IETF 92. Dave Thaler plans to send out an updated version of the slides soon.

Dave Thaler will invite Hannes Tschofenig to join the IAB at 1500 on Sunday for a dry run of the plenary presentation.

5. BOF Coverage at IETF 92

The IAB plans to cover BOFs and Proposed Research Groups at IETF 92 as follows:

  • ACME: Brian Trammell is covering; Ted Hardie is one of the co-chairs; Joe Hildebrand will participate.
  • DOTS: Brian Trammell is covering; Russ Housley is a co-chair.
  • HRPC (IRTF): Mary Barnes is covering.
  • LUCID: Joe Hildebrand and Suzanne Woolf are covering; Marc Blanchet and Dave Thaler are co-chairs; Andrew Sullivan is presenting.
  • MODERN: Mary Barnes and Suzanne Woolf are covering.
  • NETVC: Ted Hardie and Robert Sparks are covering.
  • SPUD: Robert Sparks and Dave Thaler are covering; Joe Hildebrand and Brian Trammell are BOF proponents; Eliot Lear is one of the co- chairs.
  • SUPA: Erik Nordmark is covering
  • T2TRG (IRTF): Dave Thaler is covering the portions that do not conflict with the IAB meeting.

6. draft-iab-privsec-confidentiality-threat

The IAB agreed to send draft-iab-privsec-confidentiality-threat out for IETF community review pending edits to be made by Brian Trammell. Brian will update the document and send it to Russ Housley for posting during the pre-IETF 92 blackout period. Once the new version is posted, Russ will send out the community review message.

7. draft-iab-2870bis

Marc Blanchet reported that editing of draft-iab-2870bis to address comments made during IETF Last Call has been handed off to his co-author, who is one of the RSSAC chairs. Jari Arkko noted that the
document is on the IESG agenda for discussion tomorrow, and noted that additional comments are still welcome in advance of that discussion.

8. Additional Transparency on IAB Statements

The IAB discussed increasing transparency around proposed IAB statements, such as sending out advance notice that the IAB is considering a statement on a topic. Several IAB members noted that a concrete policy would not be feasible, as often cases arise where there are time constraints in place, or where pre-releasing the intent to make a statement would lessen the impact of the statement itself.

Eliot Lear suggested that there is a broader issue, and that the IAB should consider when it is appropriate to issue a statement, and when the IAB should publish an RFC, as IAB-stream RFCs go out for community review before publication. In some cases, it may be appropriate for the IAB to issue a brief statement saying that they are working on a topic, and then follow up with a more in-depth RFC. He added that the IAB should also consider how they time the release of IAB statements, especially in cases where other organizations would benefit from having a heads-up about the statement in advance.

Brian Trammell noted that in many cases, the subjects of IAB statements are listed as deliverables on the web pages of the various IAB Programs from which they originate. Ted Hardie suggested that in such cases, calling out the work in progress on the IETF-Announce and new-work mailing lists may be appropriate.

9. Meeting with U.S. Government Accountability Office

Andrew Sullivan reported that he, Marc Blanchet, and Leslie Daigle were invited to meet via conference call with the U.S. Government Accountability Office to discuss the IANA transition. Andrew noted that all three of them will be speaking as individuals during this conversation. Andrew will send a summary of the discussion to the IAB after the meeting.

10. 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.