Minutes of the 2015-12-16 IAB Teleconference (Business Meeting)
1. Roll-call, agenda-bash, administrivia, minutes
- Jari Arkko (IETF Chair)
- Alia Atlas (IESG Liaison)
- Mary Barnes
- Marc Blanchet
- Michelle Cotton (IANA Liaison)
- Ralph Droms
- Lars Eggert (IRTF Chair)
- Heather Flanagan (RFC Editor Liaison)
- Mat Ford (ISOC Liaison)
- Ted Hardie
- Joe Hildebrand
- Russ Housley
- Cindy Morgan (IAB Executive Administrative Manager)
- Erik Nordmark
- Jonne Soininen (ICANN Liaison)
- Robert Sparks
- Andrew Sullivan (IAB Chair)
- Brian Trammell
- Suzanne Woolf
- Amy Vezza (IETF Secretariat)
- Sarah Banks (RSOC Chair)
- Dave Thaler
Cindy Morgan noted that she will send a reminder for the ICANN Technical Liaison Group call for nominations.
Cindy Morgan reminded the IAB to make their hotel reservations for IETF 95.
1.3. Meeting Minutes
The minutes of the 9 December 2015 business meeting remain under review.
1.4. Action Item Review
The internal action item list was reviewed.
2. Monthly Reports
2.1. ISOC Liaison Report
–Begin ISOC Liaison Report, Mat Ford–
Internet Society Liaison Report to the IAB 16 Dec 2015 Topics: I. IEEE-ISOC Fellowship Exchange II. Discussion Paper: The Mobile App Divide III. ICANN accountability IV. W3C Privacy Interest Group (PING) I. IEEE-ISOC Fellowship Exchange The inaugural IEEE-ISOC Fellowship Exchange was recently succesfully delivered. The objective of this programme is to deepen the participation of individuals from developing countries in open Internet standards development. This will be achieved by sending small cohorts to IETF meetings and IEEE 802 Plenary meetings. The first group participated in the recently concluded 802 Plenary in Dallas. They will also participate in the IETF 95 meeting in Buenos Aires. The next cohort will attend the 802 Plenary in Macau and the IETF 96 meeting in Berlin. II. Discussion Paper: The Mobile App Divide The Internet Society released the first paper in its new Discussion Paper Series. This paper presents the mobile app economy as creating significant revenues and opportunities for entrepreneurs, but notes that these are not available in all countries. In developing regions, there are often only a few countries where app developers can distribute paid apps through app stores - in most other countries they can only provide free apps, and in some countries there is not even the possibility to provide free apps. In style, the discussion papers are intended to be longer than a blog post and shorter than a full research study, and likewise, in substance they represent our emerging opinion, but do not represent a final Internet Society position. Instead, we intend these papers as a means to gather information and insight from our community on the topics. The discussion will inform our view on the issue, and will be reflected in a revised version of the paper. See <http://www.internetsociety.org/doc/discussion-paper-mobile-app-divide> for details. III. ICANN accountability The CCWG-Accountability has just released its proposal and is seeking community feedback. The Draft Proposal contains proposed enhancements to ICANN’s accountability framework that have been identified as essential to happen or be committed to before the IANA Stewardship Transition takes place. The six Chartering Organizations for the CCWG-Accountability are asked to indicate their support for the recommendations in this proposal. At the same time, public participants not involved with a Chartering Organization are invited to comment on the proposal. The CCWG- Accountability will attempt to reconcile reactions from Chartering Organizations and public comment prior to submission to the ICANN Board of Directors (currently anticipated for late January 2016). IV. W3C Privacy Interest Group (PING) The Privacy Interest Group (PING) has published a Draft Group Note of Fingerprinting Guidance for Web Specification Authors here: <http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/NOTE-fingerprinting-guidance-20151124/> Feedback is invited and welcome. A recent blogpost also highlights this work and mentions other tools being developed by W3C to ensure security and privacy of the open Web platform <https://www.w3.org/blog/2015/12/tools-to-ensure-security-and-privacy-of-the-open-web-platform/>
–End ISOC Liaison Report, Mat Ford–
2.2. IESG Liaison Report
–Begin IESG Liaison Report, Alia Atlas–
IESG Discussing: An IESG Statement on Virtual Meetings Recent new working groups: Codec Encoding for LossLess Archiving and Realtime transmission (cellar) Current new chartering: CAPtive PORTal interaction (capport) - IESG approved, pending charter edits CURves, Deprecating and a Little more Encryption (curdle) Font Top Level Media Type (justfont) Current rechartering: Pending rechartering: Recently closed working groups: Personnel changes: RMCAT chair addition: added Anna Brunstrom
–End IESG Liaison Report, Alia Atlas–
2.3. IRTF Chair Report
–Begin IRTF Chair Report, Lars Eggert–
- ANRP 2016 selection completed, six out of 49 papers chosen - T2TRG and HRPC chartered
–End IRTF Chair Report, Lars Eggert–
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) CCWG-Accountability - Draft Proposal on Work Stream 1 Recommendations (https://www.icann.org/public-comments/draft-ccwg-accountability- proposal-2015-11-30-en) End date: 21 Dec 2015 Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) Operational Profile for gTLD Registries and Registrars (https://www.icann.org/public-comments/rdap- profile-2015-12-03-en) End date: 18 Jan 2016 Label Generation Ruleset for the Root Zone Version 1 (LGR-1) (https://www.icann.org/public-comments/lgr-1-2015-12-04-en) II. Upcoming topics that could be relevant =========================================== CCWG accountability draft report -------------------------------------------- CCWG has published their last draft and sent it for approval to the chartering organization, which should then in the end of the process approve the final report. There is also a expedited public comment period going on, which will end by December 21st, 2015. There are certainly issues in the report that do concern the IAB/IETF and IAB should consider commenting on the report. Board comments on the CCWG report --------------------------------------------------- The ICANN board has provided its comments to the draft report (http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-draft-ccwg-accountability- proposal-30nov15/msg00013.html). The board's intention is to improve the report and the comments are intended to be very constructive. The board is trying to highlight the areas where there are some issues and is also trying to provide a potential solution for the issues. However, it is understood that these proposals for solutions might be needing work together with the CCWG. RDAP profile ------------------ IAB might want to take a look at the RDAP profile under open consultation in ICANN (https://www.icann.org/public-comments/rdap- profile-2015-12-03-en) as it relates to the use of IETF work. III. (If relevant) upcoming meeting topics of importance ========================================================= ICANN#55 Marrakech March 5-10, 2016
–End ICANN Liaison Report, Jonne Soininen–
2.5. IANA Liaison Report
–Begin IANA Liaison Report, Michelle Cotton–
IANA Liaison Report – 16 December 2015 2014 SLA Deliverables Update: - ICANN met 98% of processing goal times for the November 2015 monthly statistic 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. Other News: - We have completed a request for .arpa, which included updating the IPv4 and IPv6 for h.root-servers.net
–End IANA Liaison Report, Michelle Cotton–
2.6. RFC Editor Liaison Report
–Begin RFC Editor Liaison Report, Heather Flanagan–
RSE Update * Format project The documents capturing the XML vocabulary and various format requirements have been accepted as IAB stream documents. The documents are undergoing a review by the IAB; after the review and resolution of any issues, the documents will be sent out for community comment. * European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) Thanks to an introduction by Joe Hildebrand, the RSE met with staff at ETSI to discuss the RFC publication process and format project. ETSI is considering a document format change and are interested in how Internet Drafts are created, how the editing process might change with the new format, and what decisions and challenges were involved with the RFC format project. They are particularly interested in annotating requirements within a standards document, and helping authors find a more collaborative workflow than exchanging MS Word documents. Additional conversations may develop as they learn more about other activities in the standards publishing space (i.e., NISO's Standards Tagging Suite effort; see below). * RFC Editor Automated Stats and Metrics project The Statement of Work for the Stats and Metrics project has been updated to reflect the change in SLA structure for 2016. This is a fairly minor change to the SoW, and the Tools Committee is planning a final review on their 15 December call. Current expectations have the RFP and SoW going out shortly. * International Association of Scientific, Technical, and Medical Publishers workshops The RSE attended the recent STM association workshops in London. The STM association met for three days to discuss current trends in the digital publishing industry, look at innovations that may impact the industry going forward, and to think about what role publisher play in the ethics of science. Particular points of interest included discussion on the challenges around publishing for an international market (one publisher had to create their own font to support the range of characters they needed to display in their various journal, book, and database platforms), as well as a discussion on "build versus buy" as it applies to the publishing arena. Some publishers, for example, have chosen to focus purely on the selection and editing of material, leaving the hosting and distribution to specialists. When discussing ethics and research integrity, several of the speakers noted the issues with accountability and long author lists, a problem that the RFC Editor and the document streams managed to mitigate early on in the history of the Series. The agendas and presentations are available online: http://www.stm-assoc.org/events/digital-publishing-seminar-2015/ http://www.stm-assoc.org/events/innovations-seminar-2015/ http://www.stm-assoc.org/events/publication-ethics-and-research-integrity/ *NISO Standards Tagging Suite The NISO STS working group has begun having phone calls to review the requirements for a Standards Tagging Suite. The RSE is participating in this effort to see what from the xml2rfc v3 vocabulary might be useful and applicable to the STS effort and what, in turn, might come out of the STS effort that could inform our XML vocabulary. An announcement of the project is available online: http://www.niso.org/workrooms/sts/ RPC Update * The SLA was not met for November 2015. See the stats and reports here: https://www.rfc-editor.org/report-summary/ * Happy Holidays! Please note that AMS is closed from Dec 24 - Jan 1; we will return to work on Jan 4. Please continue to send mail to <firstname.lastname@example.org>, as we will be checking the mail for urgent issues.
–End RFC Editor Liaison Report, Heather Flanagan–
3. DNSSEC trust anchors
The IAB will continue the discussion about whether to have a technical topic on the DNSSEC trust anchor rollover at IETF 95 via email.
4. IAB Comment on RDAP
Andrew Sullivan has an action item to draft text for the comments on the Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) Operational Profile for gTLD Registries and Registrars and send them out to the IAB and Privacy and Security Program mailing lists for review. Marc Blanchet and Russ Housley agreed to help with this if needed.
5. Review Responses for RFC Format Drafts
The IAB discussed how to handle comments on the RFC Format drafts that cannot be resolved by the document authors without IAB input. The IAB agreed to ask RSOC for their recommendations. Ted Hardie will draft a message with the current outstanding questions and send it to RSOC.
6. 2016 Retreat
The IAB discussed dates for the 2016 retreat, noting the tradeoffs between having the retreat earlier, having everyone able to attend in-person, and co-locating with the IESG. Currently, the week of May 16-20 is most preferred by the IAB. Jari Arkko will follow up with the IESG on their dates at the next IESG meeting.
7. CCWG 3rd Draft Response
The IAB approved a response to the CCWG-accountability 3rd draft proposal. Andrew Sullivan will fill out the survey and include the IAB comments; Cindy Morgan will post the comments on the IAB website.
Additionally, the IAB discussed whether to comment on the CCWG-Accountability suggestion that the operational communities be given veto power over the IANA budget. Jonne Soininen will ask the ICANN Board to clarify the suggestion, and based on their response to that inquiry, Andrew Sullivan will start an e-vote on the proposed comments.
8. IRTF Chair Desired Expertise
Lars Eggert will draft text for the desired expertise for the IRTF Chair Role. Robert Sparks and Brian Trammell agreed to help edit the text.
9. Preparing for confirming the NomCom IESG selections
Cindy Morgan will update the iab-confirm mailing list with the current non-recused IAB members who will confirm the IESG slate from NomCom. Robert Sparks will let the NomCom Chair know to send their materials to that list.