Internet Architecture Board


IAB Minutes 2021-06-16

Home»Documents»Minutes»Minutes 2021»IAB Minutes 2021-06-16

Minutes of the 2021-06-16 IAB Teleconference

1. Administrivia

1.1. Attendance

  • Jari Arkko
  • Deborah Brungard
  • Ben Campbell
  • Michelle Cotton (IANA Liaison)
  • Lars Eggert (IETF Chair)
  • Wes Hardaker
  • Cullen Jennings
  • John Levine (Temporary RFC Series Project Manager)
  • Zhenbin Li
  • Jared Mauch
  • Cindy Morgan (IAB Executive Administrative Manager)
  • Tommy Pauly
  • Karen O’Donoghue (ISOC Liaison)
  • Colin Perkins (IRTF Chair)
  • Amy Vezza (IETF Secretariat)
  • Martin Vigoureux (IESG Liaison)
  • Russ White
  • Jiankang Yao
  • Mirja Kühlewind (IAB Chair)
  • David Schinazi
  • Warren Kumari
  • Daniel Migault
  • Greg Wood

1.2. Agenda bash and announcements

No new items were added to the agenda.

1.3. Meeting Minutes

The following meeting minutes were approved:

  • 2021-05-26 business meeting & technical discussion – (draft submitted 2021-05-26)
  • 2021-06-02 business meeting – (draft submitted 2021-06-02)

1.4. Action Item Review

  • 2021-04-07: Tommy Pauly (with Christoph Paasch and Stuart Cheshire) to update the proposal for an IAB workshop on user-consumable network quality and send it to the IAB for further refinement.
  • 2021-05-18: Cindy Morgan to follow up with Stuart Cheshire about setting up a web page for the Network Quality Workshop. (Page should be live by 2021-06-09.)
  • 2021-05-05: Cullen Jennings to reach out to Warren Kumari and Rob Wilton on living documents and report back to the IAB.
In Progress:
  • 2021-04-07: Wes Hardaker (with Cullen Jennings, Colin Perkins, and Russ White) to come up with a list of subjective tags that define common characteristics of good RFCs.
  • 2021-04-27: Deborah Brungard to work with Alvaro Retana (Jiankang Yao, Zhenbin Li) on a proposal about the IAB coordinating outreach efforts.
  • 2021-04-29: Tommy Pauly to come up with a list of things for the IAB to review during the WG chartering process.
  • 2021-04-29: Karen O’Donoghue to arrange a discussion between the IAB and the ISOC team working on moderation issues.
  • 2021-05-18: Mirja Kühlewind and Colin Perkins to continue working with Niels ten Oever to refine the proposal for a workshop on IETF participation trends.
  • 2021-05-18: Ben Campbell (with Tommy Pauly and Wes Hardaker) to draft an IAB Statement on inclusive language.
  • 2021-05-26: Jari Arkko to send mail to the arch-discuss list on the work ongoing in the ICANN root server system.
  • 2021-05-26: Jari Arkko to bring the tech trends topic from retreat to an IAB meeting in June.
  • 2021-05-26: Russ White and Jared Mauch to review the IAB discussion on “The Internet of Three Protocols” and draft a problem statement to see if there is work that the IAB can do in this space.
  • 2021-06-16: Cindy Morgan to follow up on the Community Coordination Group appointments.

2. Monthly Reports

2.1. IESG Liaison Report

–Begin IESG Liaison Report, Ben Campbell–

Lars is preparing a blog post to the effect that, while the IESG 
appreciates post-meeting feedback regarding side meetings, the IESG 
thinks the current level of support is appropriate does not plan to 
change that.

Jay asked if the IESG wanted to strengthen the statement that side 
meetings do no collect blue sheets to say that side meetings should not 
collect personal information. Multiple ADs mentioned that this did not 
seem practical, and that taking attendee lists and capturing contact 
information for future discussion seemed normal. The conclusion is that 
Jay will remind people that the privacy statement applies.

Rob noted that github comes with it’s own code of conduct that would 
bind any IETF participant using GIT. Should the IESG care? Jay forwarded 
the question to counsel.

Erik is considering rechartering NTP to broaden the scope to cover 
network time protocols in general.

The IESG published the proposed policy on individual email addresses 
under the domain and asked for community feedback.

The IESG has finalized the job descriptions for the NOMCOM.

–End IESG Liaison Report, Ben Campbell–

2.2. IRTF Chair Report

–Begin IRTF Chair Report, Colin Perkins–

IRTF chair report to the IAB for the month ending 16 June 2021.

# Research Groups

Recent workshop on LEO satellite networking organised by ETH Zürich, 
( potentially target an IRTF research group; 
discussion ongoing.


The ANRP award talks for IETF 111 will be given by Rüdiger Birkner 
("Config2spec: Mining Network Specifications from Network 
Configurations", NSDI 2020) and Sadjad Fouladi ("Salsify: low-latency 
network video through tighter integration between a video codec and a 
transport protocol”, NSDI 2018).


13 papers and two invited talks were accepted from 28 submissions. 
Registration will open shortly. Started scheduling discussion with 
secretariat - ANRW complicates IETF scheduling due to large number of 
sessions with many conflicts.

# Documents and Errata

draft-irtf-panrg-what-not-to-do sent to RFC Editor (UTH48)
draft-oran-icnrg-qosarch sent to RFC Editor
draft-irtf-cfrg-argon2 ready for RFC Editor
draft-irtf-icnrg-icn-lte-4g completed IRSG ballot; returned to RG
draft-irtf-icnrg-icnlowpan ready for IESG conflict review
draft-irtf-icnrg-nrs-requirements in IRSG final poll
draft-irtf-cfrg-hpke in IRSG final poll
draft-irtf-panrg-questions in IRSG review
draft-irtf-icnrg-nrsarch-considerations-04 in IRSG review
draft-irtf-pearg-numeric-ids-history-07 in IRSG review
draft-irtf-pearg-numeric-ids-generation-07 in IRSG review
draft-irtf-nwcrg-nwc-ccn-reqs-05 in IRTF Chair review
draft-irtf-cfrg-spake2-18 in IRTF Chair review

–End IRTF Chair Report, Colin Perkins–

2.3. ICANN Liaison Report

–Begin ICANN Liaison Report, Harald Alvestrand–

This report covers the state of the ICANN as seen from the liaison as 
per June 12, 2021.

New gTLD round - SubPro

The Global Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) has spoken, concluding 
its policy work: There should be a next gTLD application round. Now 
there are just a few details to work out.

A number of communities (including the SSAC, representing security 
concerns, and the GAC, representing government concerns) think that 
there are serious concerns that must be addressed before launching the 
new round - one of those, the subject of a multi-year study led by the 
SSAC (the NCAP study), concerns the problem of collisions between new 
TLDs and names that have been used internally in companies and private 

A main problem here is that it’s not clear either when the problem has 
been studied enough or what conclusions can be drawn from it (all the 
way from “no new gTLDs are safe to release” to “it’s not a problem - 
just go ahead” are still theoretically possible outcomes).

This is just one example of an issue that has been raised - and might 
not even be the hardest one. But it serves to illustrate the pattern of 
“we can’t launch this until the studies have concluded”, and the lack of 
progress in actually concluding those studies.

Still, ICANN is in the process of launching an Operational Design Phase 
for this area too - basically figuring out how we can do this, what it 
is likely to cost, and what the blocking factors are. It’s not yet 
formally launched, but is getting close.

Access to non-public registrant info - GDPR, EPDP, SSAD

This area continues to be a tribute to ICANN’s ability to drag any 
process out for an indefinite amount of time while still not totally 
precluding sensible action.

The Expedited PDP (EPDP) policy process has long ended, resulting in a 
final report that left core questions unanswered. The current work is 
called “EPDP phase 2”, which has produced a “final report of EPDP phase 
2A”, leaving - again - some questions to be answered in “EPDP phase 2B”.

The current thought is that in order to satisfy law enforcement et al’s 
requirement for an “one stop, one size” method to get private 
information about any registrant, ICANN should operate (or license an 
operator for) a central gateway that offers authentication and 
authorization information about information requestsers and relays those 
requests to registries and registrars who actually have the information. 
This (like any proposal in this area) has proved fiercely controversial, 
with some people saying “it is a very expensive boondoggle that won’t 
satisfy either the people who want access or the privacy advocates”. 
Still, ICANN is going ahead with what’s called an “Operational Design 
Phase” - basically figuring out who can do such a thing and how much it 
would cost to build and operate it.

In the meantime, the world is operating under the “temporary 
specification” that basically says “you have to ask registries and 
registrars for that information; if they don’t give it to you, and you 
think you’re entitled, you can complain to ICANN”. Some complaints have 
come in, but not really very many; it is not clear whether this is 
because there are few problems or whether it is because the prospective 
complainants don’t want to bother with using ICANN’s complaint mechanism 
to complain.

Reviews, reviews, reviews…

A particular aspect of ICANN’s operation is its infinitude of 
overlapping, recurring and long-running reviews.

A couple of these have recently concluded, delivered their final reports 
(after public comments), and are now transforming into “implementation 
teams” that are cooperating with the board and in overseeing 
the implementations of the recommendations contained in those reports.

Recent reports include WS2 (in the process of planning the 
implementation of the board-accepted recommendations) and SSR2 (in the 
process of evaluating the recommendations to see which ones the board 
will accept, which ones it needs to reject as infeasible or not in the 
global public interest, which ones are input to the policy-making 
process, and which ones need further work to understand which 
disposition is the right one.

Financials: Acronym of the week - SFICR 

As the published financials show, ICANN has had a quite large reduction 
in expenses due to the cancellation of in-person meetings, and has a 
quite satisfactory reserve capital.

At the same time, there are a number of projects that have been proposed 
- including the review implementation, the SSAD and the SubPro ODP 
mentioned above.

In response to these two issues, an opportunity was found to set up a 
fund from which one would fund projects that are outside ICANN’s day-to-
day operation.

–End ICANN Liaison Report, Harald Alvestrand–

2.4. IANA Liaison Report

–Begin IANA Liaison Report, Michelle Cotton–

IANA Services Liaison Report – 16 June 2021
SLA Deliverables Update:
- ICANN met 100% of processing goal times for the May 2021 monthly 
statistics report, exceeding the SLA goal to meet 90% of processing goal 
times.  These times include the steps that ICANN has control over and 
not time it is waiting on requesters, document authors or other experts.  
Monthly reports can be found at:
Other News:
Work with the IETF trust on licensing language for protocol parameter 
registries is close to being completed.
Staff update: New Director of IANA Operations, Amy Creamer, has joined 
the IANA Operations Team.
Engagement for input to the PTI Fiscal Year 2023 (FY23) Operating Plan 
and Budget will begin soon.   
IANA Services Operator and IETF Leadership Meeting Minutes:
None to report.

–End IANA Liaison Report, Michelle Cotton–

2.5. RFC Editor Liaison Report

–Begin RFC Editor Liaison Report, John Levine–

An ad-hoc committee convened by the RSOC is still working through the 
changes to the XML V3 vocabulary since RFC 7991 and making slow but 
perceptible progress.  The knotty question of whether to go back and 
change the XML in published RFCs, or do some sort of V3.1 version or 
perhaps something else still remains unresolved.  The [Temporary RFC 
Series Project Manager] plans to reengage with the community about the 
question of the immutability or not of the XML and the text in published 

Related to this, you may have seen some discussion about whether to 
deprecate the  element, since reliably formatting physical 
addresses turns out to be very hard, and we have no reports of anyone 
actually using the physical address in recent memory to contact authors.

–End RFC Editor Liaison Report, John Levine–

2.6. RSOC Chair Report

–Begin RSOC Chair Report, Peter Saint-Andre–

1. The RFC XML and Style Guide change management team is still working
toward resolution of open issues related to the v3 XML format, but
should finish that task in the next ~4 weeks. After that we can turn our
attention to updating the relevant documentation (primarily 7991bis but
secondarily the xml2rfc implementation notes, v3 FAQ for authors, and
the style guide web page).

2. We are collaborating with Jay Daley and John Levine on next steps to
make it easier for authors to use the v3 XML format during all stages of
the authoring process (e.g., by surveying tools developers to identify
which tools have support for v3 output, encouraging those developers to
make v3 output the default where possible, and better documenting how
authors can use these tools to produce v3 source documents when
submitting Internet-Drafts to the RPC).

–End RSOC Chair Report, Peter Saint-Andre–

3. draft-iana-arpa-authoritative-servers

The community review period for draft-iana-arpa-authoritative-servers ended on 2021-06-03. Jari Arkko reported that there are several comments from the community review that will be addressed in a new revision.

4. ICANN Governance Working Group Document

Wes Hardaker updated the IAB on the work happening in the ICANN Governance Working Group (GWG) after disclosing the following conflicts of interest:

  • Root server operator for
  • IAB member
  • RSSAC member
  • RSSAC037 author
  • DNS specification author
  • “LocalRoot” creator
  • “DNSSEC-Tools” creator
  • Author of multiple DNS research measurement papers

The DNS root was created in 1983 by Jon Postel and Paul Mockapetris with 4 original servers. The root expanded to 13 identifiers over the years, with 26 total addresses (v4/v6). Today, there are 1380 instances run by 12 organizations. There have been no operator changes since Jon Postel passed away in 1998, and there is an open question about how to add or remove one now, and when there might be a need to do so.

ICANN/RSSAC began discussions about root server system (RSS) evolution and governance in June 2015. RSSAC037 and RSSAC038 were published in June 2018. The Root Server System Governance Working Group (RSS GWG) was created in early 2020 to make the RSSAC037 model concrete.

The IAB appointed Ted Hardie and Geoff Huston to the GWG; Ted currently serves as its chair.

RSSAC037 defines eleven principles for the operation and evolution of the DNS Root Server System:

  1. To remain a global network, the Internet requires a globally unique public namespace.
  2. IANA is the source of DNS root data.
  3. The RSS must be a stable, reliable, and resilient platform for the DNS service to all users.
  4. Diversity of the root server operations is a strength of the overall system.
  5. Architectural changes should result from technical evolution and demonstrated technical need.
  6. The IETF defines technical operation of the DNS protocol.
  7. RSOs must operate with integrity and an ethos demonstrating a commitment to the common good of the Internet.
  8. RSOs must be transparent.
  9. RSOs must collaborate and engage with the stakeholder community.
  10. RSOs must be autonomous and independent.
  11. RSOs must be neutral and impartial.

RSSAC037 also proposes an initial governance model for the root server system and its operators. In this model, the stakeholders are the ICANN community, the IETF/IAB, and the RSOs. The ICANN board would approve all changes, and operations participate in policy decisions as needed through memberships in the various RSSAC037 functional bodies.

The GWG is different; it would create the Public Root Services (PRS) as an affiliate of ICANN, with ICANN being the only member. The PRS board would have 9 directors, including 1 appointed by the IAB. In this model, the PRS board would approve all changes.

The Strategy, Architecture and Policy Council (SAPF) would:

  • Ensure that the guiding principles of the RSS and RSOs, as documented in RSSAC037, remain embedded in technical and operational architectures.
  • Define system-wide, externally verifiable metrics to demonstrate that the RSS as a whole is online, serving correct and timely responses to end users.
  • Define behaviors and measurements for individual RSOs to ensure that they are meeting an adequate and acceptable level of performance consistent with system-wide metrics.
  • Provide guidance and develop best practices for root server operations based on industry-accepted best practices for the design, capacity, and availability of root servers. The guidance and best practices support the availability, performance, scalability, and security of the RSS.
  • Commission technical proposals related to the evolution of root service in close collaboration with other groups who have a role in the provision of root service.

Wes Hardaker noted that the root is the foundation of how the DNS works. Political infighting could have technical ramifications. The DNS is an IETF protocol governed at the top by ICANN; the protocol needs to be resilient.

The RSOs are currently reviewing the GWG document in comparison to RSSAC037.

Jari Arkko said that it would be good to remind the IETF community that this discussion is happening, but that it would probably be better to do so when the documents are more stable.

5. Executive Session: Community Coordination Group Appointment

In an executive session, the IAB voted to reappoint Russ Housley and Barry Leiba to the Community Coordination Group. Cindy Morgan will follow up with them and send out an announcement.