Internet Architecture Board

RFC2850

IAB Minutes 2021-03-24

Home»Documents»Minutes»Minutes 2021»IAB Minutes 2021-03-24

Minutes of the 2021-03-24 IAB Teleconference

1. Administrivia

1.1. Attendance

Present:
  • Jari Arkko
  • Deborah Brungard
  • Ben Campbell
  • Lars Eggert (IETF Chair)
  • Wes Hardaker
  • Cullen Jennings
  • Mirja Kühlewind (IAB Chair)
  • Zhenbin Li
  • Jared Mauch
  • Cindy Morgan (IAB Executive Administrative Manager)
  • Karen O’Donoghue (ISOC Liaison)
  • Tommy Pauly
  • Colin Perkins (IRTF Chair)
  • David Schinazi
  • Amy Vezza (IETF Secretariat)
  • Martin Vigoureux (IESG Liaison)
  • Russ White
  • Jiankang Yao
Guest:
  • Barbara Stark (IETF NomCom Chair 2020-2021)
Observer:
  • Greg Wood

1.2. Agenda bash & announcements

Cindy Morgan noted that with the start of Summer Time in the EU on 2021-03-28, IAB meetings will be one hour later for members in Europe.

Cullen Jennings added an item to the agenda on the IAB’s use of chat tools.

Mirja Kühlewind added an item to the agenda on the Liaison Coordinator role.

2. NomCom Feedback for the IAB

Barbara Stark, IETF NomCom Chair 2020-2021, joined the IAB to discuss some of the feedback that the was received during the NomCom process.

Barbara Stark noted that there was a strong desire for balance in the IAB in several different ways:

  • Balance between different technical areas
  • Balance between different geographic areas
  • Balance between people who are newer to the IETF and people who have a lot of experience in the IETF

Barbara Stark added that there was a desire for the IAB to have a more global perspective and do more outreach and engagement with other SDOs and the open source community.

Barbara Stark noted that there is a perception that the IAB spends too much time on administrative tasks, and would like to see more focus on the Internet architecture.

Tommy Pauly said that the IAB would probably agree that they would like to spend more time on technical work as opposed to administrative tasks. Wes Hardaker asked if the people who gave that feedback were aware of the large number of administrative things that the IAB is responsible for; Barbara Stark replied that there was no advice given about that. Mirja Kühlewind added that the administrative work is often fairly straightforward and thus more visible. Technical discussions may go on for a long time and not reach a concrete conclusion.

Cullen Jennings asked for more details about the comments on geographic diversity. Barbara Stark replied that some of it was related to New IP and concerns about China, so there was a desire to have people from China be part of the conversations.

Barbara Start said that there was feedback that the IAB should be active in discussions about how to evolve the Internet architecture to meet the needs of future generations.

Mirja Kühlewind said that she had received some feedback that people think that the IAB either does not know about or does not care about New IP, which is not the case; the topic is fairly political, so the work is not much more visible than the public liaison statements.

Ben Campbell suggested that the IAB might benefit from repeating itself more often and evangelizing its own statements.

Barbara Stark noted that there is also a desire for more IAB-led workshops and support for new work (e.g. BOF) proposals.

3. Meeting Minutes

The following meeting minutes were approved:

  • 2021-02-24 business meeting – (draft submitted 2021-02-24)
  • 2021-03-03 business meeting – (draft submitted 2021-03-03)

4. Action Item Review

Done:

  • 2021-03-02: Jari Arkko to update the text describing the IAB-IANA Group and send it to the IAB.

In Progress:

  • 2021-01-06: Jared Mauch to organize a side meeting on DDoS/attack protection. Due April 2021.

New:

  • 2021-03-24: Cindy Morgan to send draft-iab-covid19-workshop out for community review.
  • 2021-03-24: Lars Eggert to start a conversation with the IESG about converging on a single common chat tool to be used by the IAB and IESG.
  • 2021-03-24: Cullen Jennings to look into moving the IAB over to a paid Slack instance.
  • 2021-03-24: Cullen Jennings to let RSOC know that the IAB endorses their recommendation on extending the Temporary RFC Series Manager contract.
  • 2021-03-24: Mirja Kühlewind to follow up with Jay Daley about extending the Temporary RFC Series Manager contract.

5. Monthly Reports

5.1. IRTF Chair Report

–Begin IRTF Chair Report, Colin Perkins–

IRTF chair report to the IAB for the month ending 24 March 2021.

# Research Groups

All groups apart from DINRG met co-located with IETF 110. There is also 
a strong programme of interim meetings and seminars planned. Seeking co-
chairs for DINRG and potentially CFRG.

# ANRP

Interesting ANRP award talks at IETF 110 by Francis Y. Yan and Audrey 
Randall, both of whom seemed to make good contacts despite the meeting 
running online. Awards for IETF 111 will go to Rüdiger Birkner and 
Sadjad Fouladi. Details at https://irtf.org/anrp/

# ANRW

The ANRW call for papers is open, with Nick Feamster and Andra Lutu 
chairing. Papers are due 21 April.

# Documents and Errata

draft-irtf-panrg-what-not-to-do IESG conflict review completed, 
 resolving nits
draft-oran-icnrg-qosarch IESG conflict review completed, awaiting IRTF 
 chair
draft-irtf-icnrg-icn-lte-4g completed IRSG ballot; returned to RG
draft-irtf-icnrg-icnlowpan completed IRSG ballot; revision needed
draft-irtf-cfrg-argon2 completed IESG conflcit review; ready for RFC 
 Editor
draft-irtf-cfrg-hpke in IRSG review
draft-irtf-panrg-questions in IRSG review
draft-irtf-icnrg-nrs-requirements in IRSG review
draft-irtf-icnrg-nrsarch-considerations-04 in IRSG review
draft-irtf-pearg-numeric-ids-history-07 awaiting IRSG review
draft-irtf-pearg-numeric-ids-generation-07 awaiting IRSG review

CFRG chairs working to resolve other outstanding errata: resolution for 
erratum 5930 on RFC 8032 under discussion on list.

–End IRTF Chair Report, Colin Perkins–

5.2. RSOC Chair Report

–Begin RSOC Chair Report, Peter Saint-Andre–

As you know from the December 2020 RSOC minutes [1] we agreed to
reinstate the previous SLA as of Q4 2020, with full knowledge that
Cluster 238 would have an impact in Q4 2020 and, it turns out, Q1 2021.
Thankfully that's behind us now. Future reports will include measures of
SLA performance.

Also in Q4 we established an RFC XML and Style Guide change management
team (consisting of Sandy Ginoza & Alice Russo from the RPC, John Levine
as Temporary RFC Series Project Manager, Robert Sparks from the tools
team, Henrik Levkowetz, and myself). The team continues to work toward
resolution of open issues related to the v3 XML format, with the goal of
improved stability and documentation in the next few months.

Following up on results of the RFC authoring survey conducted in 2020,
Jay Daley and John Levine have identified a number of topics for greater
clarity and improved processes (to be specified more fully in Jay's
upcoming report). The RSOC has discussed with Jay and John the
recommendations that impinge upon our remit, and will initiate three
workstreams to (in priority order) encourage the use of the v3 XML
format during all stages of the authoring process, recommend
improvements to the author review process during AUTH48, and investigate
the possibility of supporting "non-standard" document formats (such as
Markdown) in some or all stages of the authoring process.

[1] https://www.iab.org/wp-content/IAB-uploads/2021/01/2020-12-14-rsoc-minutes-v2.txt

–End RSOC Chair Report, Peter Saint-Andre–

5.3. RFC Editor Liaison Report

–Begin RFC Editor Liaison Report, John Levine–

Beyond what is in the RSOC report, we ran into one tooling bug related 
to making indexes.  Our contractor has been working on it and we expect 
it to be fixed by the time of the meeting.

–End RFC Editor Liaison Report, John Levine–

5.4. RSSAC Liaison Report

–Begin RSSAC Liaison Report, Daniel Migault–

DSA / NIS:
The meeting was mostly around commenting on the new EU directives (i.e. 
the Network Information Security (NIS) Directive and the Digital Service 
Act (DSA) ). 

Revision of the NIS directive for informational security seems to 
involve anyone RSO providing services in Europe as this is seen as 
essential services. Services qualified as essential come with specific 
requirements. 

It is suggested that RSO independently respond to the Public comments, 
and maybe ask ICANN to provide à statement after they carefully evaluate 
how they are impacted by these directives.   

Potential impacts on RSOs:
Obligation to designate a representative in one of the member states of 
the European Union where the services are offered

Entities will be subject to the jurisdiction of the member state where 
the representative is established

Management bodies of essential entities would need to receive training 
to assess and manage cybersecurity risks

The EU cybersecurity toolbox or something similar could apply; this 
could impose restrictions on hardware, software or the supply chain

Mandatory notification (within 24 hours) and post-mortem reporting on 
outages and security incidents (within one month)

Fees for non-compliance with a maximum of 2% of annual turnover or €10M

Management bodies of essential entities would also be personally liable 
for non-compliance


Working Group Party: 

Rogue RSO WP: the intention is clearly to prevent the document to be 
used to judge Russian (NDNS) initiative.  The russian initiative 
consists in serving the root zone by servers run by the russian 
government - as opposed to the root server system. 

> While this is not something new, I would suggest the IAB to follow 
this initiative, as it may present some risks to the Internet. At that 
time, on the other hand, I do not see what could be done as the move 
might be purely political.

–End RSSAC Liaison Report, Daniel Migault–

5.5. RZERC Liaison Report

–Begin RZERC Liaison Report, Tim April–

The RZERC has published the two documents. They are:

RZERC002: Recommendations Regarding Signing Root Zone Name Server Data 
<https://www.icann.org/uploads/ckeditor/rzerc-002-en.pdf>

RZERC003: Adding Zone Data Protections to the Root Zone
<https://www.icann.org/uploads/ckeditor/rzerc-003-en.pdf>

–End RZERC Liaison Report, Tim April–

6. draft-iab-covid19-workshop

The IAB agreed that draft-iab-covid19-workshop is ready for community review. Cindy Morgan will send the community review message.

7. Liaison Coordinator Role

Mirja Kühlewind asked the IAB if anyone objected to making the GitHub repository with the draft Liaison Coordinator role description public. There were no objections.

8. Chat Tools

The IAB discussed their use of various chat tools, noting that XMPP, Slack, and Webex chat were all used as back channels during teleconferences. Cullen Jennings asked the IAB if they could agree to use one tool for chat.

Lars Eggert noted that the IETF Tools Team bas been looking at Matrix and Zulip as possible replacements for XMPP.

Mirja Kühlewind said that it would be good if the IAB and the IESG would use the same chat systems.

Wes Hardaker noted that there has been resistance in the past to having to create new corporate accounts for various tools.

Lars Eggert noted that there are also multiple Slack instances; the IAB has their own free instance, the IETF LLC and Secretariat use a paid Slack instance, and there is also a volunteer-run IETF Slack instance.

Lars Eggert took an action item to start a conversation with the IESG about converging on a single common chat tool to be used by the IAB and IESG.

Cullen Jennings will look into moving the IAB over to a paid Slack instance.

9. Executive Session: RSOC recommendation for Temporary RFC Series Project Manager

In an executive session, the IAB agreed to endorse the RSOC’s recommendation to extend the current Temporary RFC Series Project Manager contract by 9 months.

Cullen Jennings will let the RSOC know that the IAB endorses their recommendation.

Mirja Kühlewind will follow up with Jay Daley about extending the Temporary RFC Series Manager contract.