Internet Architecture Board


IAB Minutes 2022-01-19

Home»Documents»Minutes»Minutes 2022»IAB Minutes 2022-01-19

Minutes of the 2022-01-19 IAB Business Meeting

1. Administrivia

1.1. Attendance

  • Jari Arkko
  • Deborah Brungard
  • Lars Eggert (IETF Chair)
  • Wes Hardaker
  • Cullen Jennings
  • Mirja Kühlewind (IAB Chair)
  • John Levine (Temporary RFC Series Project Manager)
  • Zhenbin Li
  • Jared Mauch
  • Cindy Morgan (IAB Executive Administrative Manager)
  • Tommy Pauly
  • Colin Perkins (IRTF Chair)
  • David Schinazi
  • Sabrina Tanamal (IANA Liaison)
  • Amy Vezza (IETF Secretariat)
  • Martin Vigoureux (IESG Liaison)
  • Russ White
  • Greg Wood (IETF Director of Communications and Operations)
  • Jiankang Yao
  • Ben Campbell
  • Karen O’Donoghue (ISOC Liaison)
  • Dirk Kutscher
  • Dave Oran

1.2. Agenda bash and announcements

An item on the IAB Open Meeting at IETF 113 was added to the agenda.

1.3. Meeting Minutes

The following minutes remain under review:

  • 2022-01-12 business meeting – (posted 2022-01-12)

1.4. Action item review

  • 2022-01-12: IAB to work out the details for closing the Plenary Planning Program.
  • 2022-01-12: Cindy Morgan to start an e-vote for the IESG slate confirmation.
  • 2022-01-12: Mirja Kühlewind and Cindy Morgan to find volunteers for the ISOC BoT interviews (Jari Arkko, Cullen Jennings, and Tommy Pauly have already volunteered).
  • 2021-10-27: Cullen Jennings to talk to David Schinazi about the ISE job description.
On Hold:
  • 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.
  • 2021-09-08: Liaison Coordinators to come up with a list of potential candidates to reach out to for future IAB-appointed positions.
    • Check back after next check-in with Liaison Managers (~2022-03).
In Progress:
  • 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.
  • 2021-09-01: Jari Arkko to continue editing the document on the role of discovery in ensuring that Internet technology is broadly applicable.
  • 2021-11-17: Mirja Kühlewind and Cindy Morgan to put together some options for the IAB Website revamp for the IAB to review.
  • 2022-01-12: Deborah Brungard to report back to the IAB on ISOC planning for WTSA.
  • 2022-01-18: IAB to review draft-iab-rfcefdp-rfced-model-10.
  • 2022-01-19: Wes Hardaker to send a message to the Plenary Planning Program about the closure of the Program.
  • 2022-01-19: Wes Hardaker to draft text for the Plenary Planning Program webpage noting that while the Program has been closed, the IAB is still open to suggestions about topics that are worthy of broad-area discussion in the IETF.
  • 2022-01-19: ISE Search Committee to send a summary of the candidates to the IAB.

1.5. IAB Document Status Update


  • draft-arkko-iab-path-signals-collaboration
    IAB State: Active IAB Document
  • draft-iab-mnqeu-report-00
    IAB State: Active IAB Document
  • draft-iab-protocol-maintenance-05
    IAB State: Active IAB Document (EXPIRED)
  • draft-iab-rfcefdp-rfced-model-10
    In Program Last Call (ends 2022-01-30)

1.6. WG Chartering in Progress


  • Privacy Respecting Incorporation of Values (PRIV)
    Draft Charter

1.7. Proposed BOF Requests


  • bofreq-liu-multicast-source-routing-over-ipv6msr6-04
    Multicast Source Routing over IPv6

Zhenbin Li said that he is reviewing this BOF request.

  • bofreq-li-sav-for-intra-and-inter-domain-networks-00
    SAV for intra- and inter-domain networks

Zhenbin Li said that he is reviewing this BOF request. He noted that it has a lot to do with routing, so it would be good if Russ White could review this as well.

Lars Eggert noted that this request is about reopening the SAVI WG to include inter-domain things in the scope, and asked that anyone who was involved in SAVI take a look. Jari Arkko agreed to review this.

The first BOF Coordination call with the IESG will be on 2022-01-28.

2. Monthly Reports

2.1. IANA Liaison Report

–Begin IANA Liaison Report, Sabrina Tanamal–

IANA Services Liaison Report – 19 January 2022
SLA Deliverables Update:
ICANN met 100% of processing goal times for the December 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:
Licensing information has been posted at and linked from the 
The next IETF-IANA Group meeting will take place in February.
IANA Services Operator and IETF Leadership Meeting Minutes:
Draft Meeting Minutes
Tuesday, November 16, 2021
Virtual meeting post-IETF 112
12:00 PM PST, 20:00 UTC
Mirja Kühlewind, IAB Chair
Russ Housley, IETF-IANA Group Co-Lead
Jari Arkko, IETF-IANA Group
Harald Alvestrand, IETF liaison to ICANN Board
Jay Daley, IETF LLC Executive Director
Warren Kumari, IESG Representative
Roman Danyliw, IESG Representative
Kim Davies, VP, IANA Services, ICANN, President, Public Technical Identifiers (PTI)
Amy Creamer, Director of Operations
James Mitchell, Technical Director
Michelle Cotton, Protocol Parameters Engagement Sr. Manager, IETF-IANA Group Co-Lead
Amanda Baber, IANA Operations Manager
Lars Eggert, IETF Chair
Sabrina Tanamal, Lead IANA Services Specialist
Slides presented by Amy Creamer.
1. Introductions and Welcome
Welcome to Warren Kumari and Roman Danyliw.  They volunteered as IESG 
representatives to join the IETF-IANA Group’s activities since we work 
so closely with the IESG.
2.  Review of Action Items from previous meetings
Action Item: 2019-01

Reach out to Glenn/IETF Trust and give updates if there's any pushback 
re "IANA" usage

Status: M. Cotton will start discussions after licensing topic is 
finished with Jay and the Trust

Action Item: 2021-03

Licensing discussion almost all done.  Statement has been posted.  
Announcements have been sent.

Status: Final website updates needed.

3. IANA Services Activity/Performance

Three months (July 2021-September 2021) of between-meeting cumulative 
stats are in plenary report:

No impact to IANA service levels due to COVID-19. IANA staff are working 
remotely and requests are being processed as normal.

4. Update on Supplemental Agreement Deliverables

2022 Supplemental Agreement process has started.

- Currently with ICANN for internal reviews. 

Fiscal Year 2023 (FY23) Operating Plan and Budget Activities:

- Public Webinar took place on 7/26/21 and 7/27/21
- Link to recordings:
- The public comment period ended October 25th
- No comments were received related to protocol parameters
- The Public Comment Report on PTI & IANA Ops Plan & Budget will be 
  published on November 30, 2021

5. Update on Operational Activities

Customer Service Feedback:

HDWD Post Ticket Surveys

Satisfaction Rate: Between 92.9%-100%

Response Rate: Between 62.5%-66.7%

Positive comments included.

No negative feedback received during this period.

.ARPA Management:

- RFC 9120 has been published.
- Implementation planned for March 2022.

.INT Document (draft-davies-int-historic-02):

- Version 02 was uploaded in September 2021
- Mostly complete.  Need to speak to W. Kumari as the AD sponsoring for 
  next steps.


K. Davies: There has been a small flurry of discussion on DNSOP WG list. 
Mostly supportive. Suggestion to go a bit further to use document to 
formally mark RFCs creating the .int names being deprecated as historic.  
Waiting for W. Kumari to comment. Need additional language. Not sure if 
it will affect publication process.

W. Kumari: Not sure if it should make the other docs historic. I need to 
have another look.

M. Cotton: Will ping Warren in a few weeks regarding the next steps for 
the document.

Licensing for IANA Protocol Parameter registries:

- Statement posted here:
- Announcements have been sent by ICANN and the IETF Trust
- Final updates to are pending

6. Other Topics for Discussion

Registry Workflow System:

Current status:

- Plan remains to have replacement system to process PEN requests as the 
  first phase.
- Launch date has been delayed to Q2 2022
- Early stages of planning subsequent releases

Demo of the current system by James Mitchell.

J. Mitchell: The Opal project is a replacement of how we process PENs 
and will be used for other protocol parameters.

We've been working on it for a few years.  PEN application is separate 
because of the volume of requests.  It's an aging system that needs 

- Shows system that is under development (via screen share).

J. Mitchell: This system will handle all registries and will be a more 
immersive experience.

J. Mitchell shows what information will be made public, how email 
confirmation requests will be sent, staff and user interface screens.


J. Daley: Have you considered any type of registration lock.  When you 
make it easier to make changes, you’ll receive more.

J. Mitchell: Have not seen the need yet.  Historical data will provide 
some guidance, however we need to be aware of it moving forward.

R. Danyliw: What is the volume for PEN requests?

M. Cotton: Around 120 new per month, 10-30 modifications and an 
occasional deletion.

J. Daley: Will there be any type of dashboard sitting behind this that 
would be public?

J. Mitchell: At this point of time, plan is just to replace PEN.  Focus 
was on Minimal requirements. We have changed the focus not to be as 
ruthlessly minimum.  We have a processing dashboard for the naming 
registry that we can model.

We will discuss more in the future of what dashboard capabilities are 
needed.  For example we have more yang modules derived for registries.

J. Arkko: Demo looks nice.  Consider phased approach instead of having 
the perfect system.

J. Mitchell: Phased releases is our plan.

R. Housley: Monthly data we get in the report would be OK for the first 

TZ Database:

- Discussions continue on the mailing list
- There has been no additional request to the AD for further review or 
  any appeal to the IESG
- IANA continues to monitor the discussions

IETF-112 Office Hours:

- Had about 11 visitors, 4 with substantive questions.
- Very slow this meeting, possibly due to the timezone.

Interim Office Hours Update:

- Only 1 visitor during the first experiment.
- Difficult to say whether it was successful based on just one 
- Discussing having Interim Office Hours in Gather between IETF 112 and 
  IETF 113.

Formalizing/homing the tools of production for the IANA registries:

How far should IANA pursue formalizing/homing the tools of production 
for the IANA registries?

- Made informal/low-key approaches where we know we have external 
  dependencies (e.g. tz repo, mailing lists not hosted by IANA).
- Want to make sure operations continue successfully should any specific 
  individuals no longer be involved.
- Mixed success or interest in having the current situation evolve.
- As we seek to professionalize and increase resiliency, how far should 
  we push this?
   - Does it make sense to establish a common expectation for IANA 
     hosting the relevant platforms (or having administrative 
   - Should IANA merely make best effort, or pursue additional 

K. Davies: We know we are dependent on volunteers as experts, operating 
mailing lists or tools.  No SLAs or agreements etc. for this work.

Grateful for volunteer work.  Putting it on the agenda was just to bring 
it up and have informal discussions, sound out individual opinions.

H. Alvestrand: I ran list.  Approached for moving the list.  Need to see 
what we get out of moving it.

R. Housley: Started by getting an archive at IETF, move the list to  Tools, get a copy of the tool so that if the person stopped 
maintaining it, decide if it was mission critical, we could do further 
maintenance.  Does IANA depend on Bill Fenner’s tools?

R. Danyliw:  Critical infrastructure for the IETF, the fact we have 
volunteers running these scares me, running mailings lists should be 
done by IETF.

J. Daley: Small piece of work needs to be done to look at level of 
dependency.  As long as archives, source code, web service, we don’t 
have the ability to reproduce is a serious issue.  Prioritize and plan 
for recovery that looks at how we can move forward.

M. Kühlewind: Not sure what we are talking about.  How many tools?

K. Davies: There are not many that are significantly dependent. Some 
RFCs say where the mailing lists are created.  Designated experts that 
have their own systems, beyond our ability to manage them. TZ is a good 

M. Cotton:  We will follow-up with Harald regarding the mailing list 
transfer. Another list was with Ned Freed.

K. Davies: Another example is using GitHub, a request from the IETF 
community. Not a major issue here. Risk analysis approach.

J. Mitchell: Language list with Harald and charsets working with Ned.

Outcome:  We'll have more discussion as IANA documents dependencies.

7.  Upcoming meeting schedule

With IETF-113 potentially being a Hybrid meeting, will our meeting be 
virtual post IETF-113 or during?


J. Daley: March 2022 meeting allowing around 650 people, somewhere in 

Final remarks:

R. Danyliw:  Thanks for the service that we receive.  The protocols the 
IETF creates would not be successful without the work that IANA does.

Summary of New Action items:

No new action items.

–End IANA Liaison Report, Sabrina Tanamal–

2.2. IRTF Chair Report

–Begin IRTF Chair Report, Colin Perkins–

IRTF chair report to the IAB for the month ending 19 January 2022.

# Research Groups

Interviewed potential candidates for HRPC co-chair; gathering feedback. 
Appointment of GAIA co-chair in progress.


ANRP awardees for 2022 confirmed: Sangeetha Abdu Jyothi, Gautam Akiwate, 
Corrine Cath, Sam Kumar, Bruce Spang, Tushar Swamy, and Daniel Wagner. 
Scheduling of talks in progress.


Nothing to report.

# Documents and Errata

* With RFC Editor
- draft-irtf-cfrg-hpke (AUTH48)

* In IESG Conflict Review
- draft-irtf-panrg-questions (cleared IESG Review; needs revision)

* In IRSG Final Poll
- draft-irtf-nwcrg-nwc-ccn-reqs (1 yes, 1 no-ob; poll due 2021-12-20)

* In IRSG Reviews
- draft-irtf-icnrg-icn-lte-4g (reviewer: Lars Eggert)
- draft-irtf-nwcrg-coding-and-congestion

* In IRTF Chair Review
- draft-irtf-cfrg-hash-to-curve
- draft-irtf-icnrg-ccninfo 
- draft-irtf-nmrg-ibn-concepts-definitions-06
- draft-irtf-nwcrg-bats-03
- draft-irtf-icnrg-nrsarch-considerations-06 (ready for IESG Conflict 
- draft-irtf-cfrg-spake2-24 (ready for IESG Conflict Review)

* Waiting on Revision for Next Step
- draft-irtf-hrpc-guidelines (needs revision: next step IRTF Chair 
- draft-irtf-panrg-questions-11 (needs revision: next step Send to RFC 
- draft-irtf-nmrg-ibn-intent-classification (IRSG Review complete, 
  revision needed: next step final poll)
- draft-irtf-pearg-numeric-ids-generation (IRSG Review complete, 
  revision needed: next step final poll)
- draft-irtf-pearg-numeric-ids-history (IRSG Review complete, revision 
  needed: next step final poll)
- draft-irtf-qirg-principles (IRSG review complete 2021-12-06 - revision 
  needed: next step final poll)

# Other Activities

Issued call for travel grant applications for IETF 113, sponsored by 
Netflix and Comcast. Due to the pandemic, also accepting applications 
for support for remote attendance beyond fee waivers (e.g., travel to 
remote hubs; childcare support).

–End IRTF Chair Report, Colin Perkins–

2.3. RFC Editor Liaison Report

–Begin RFC Editor Liaison Report, John Levine–

The [Temporary RFC Series Project Manager] is slogging through the 
updates to RFC 7991, which is a lengthy and tedious task.  We hope to be 
done by the February RSOC meeting.

For the ever-intriguing question of whether and how to revise the XML in 
published RFCs to match the final v3 vocabulary, we're close to a final 
proposal, simplify  addresses as described last month, and a few 
filled in default values.  Since the xml2rfc tool has improved quite a 
lot in the two years we've been using it to render RFCs, re-rendering 
the XML will produce somewhat different, generally better, output 
compared to what we have now.

He has also been working with he ED to review the new authors site, and 
planning for the transition from the current setup to the RSWG and 
recruiting a RSCE.

–End RFC Editor Liaison Report, John Levine–

3. IRTF Review: Information-Centric Networking

Dirk Kutscher and Dave Oran updated the IAB on the Information-Centric Networking Research Group (ICNRG).

Dave Oran said that overall, ICNRG is modestly healthy, with work at multiple stages of maturity. Mature work is being published as RFCs, there is decent progress on adopted work, and the community retains good leadership, at least among academic faculty/students. However, the engagement level is historically low across the whole community, and new work submissions as Internet-Drafts have mostly dried up.

ICNRG has published 5 new RFCs in the past 18 months:

  • RFC 8793: Information-Centric Networking (ICN): Content-Centric Networking (CCNx) and Named Data Networking (NDN) Terminology (Informational RFC)
  • RFC 8884: Research Directions for Using Information-Centric Networking (ICN) in Disaster Scenarios (Informational RFC)
  • RFC 9064: Considerations in the Development of a QoS Architecture for CCNx-Like Information-Centric Networking Protocols (Informational RFC)
  • RFC 9138: Design Considerations for Name Resolution Service in Information-Centric Networking (ICN) (Informational RFC)
  • RFC 9139: Information-Centric Networking (ICN) Adaptation to Low-Power Wireless Personal Area Networks (LoWPANs) (Experimental RFC)

Additionally, there are five drafts that are in RG Last Call, IRSG Review, IESG Conflict Review, or with the RFC Editor. More details are available at

Dave Oran said there is a decent pipeline of in-progress work, including:

  • Manifests for handling large objects and object collections
  • Forwarding Path Steering
  • Improvements to Flow Balance
  • Reflexive forwarding for distributed computing apps

Current research topics in ICNRG include:

  • Distributed Computing with ICN – getting beyond legacy of just content fetch
  • Leveraging the ICN security model with continuing work on trust schemas and automated trust assessment algorithms
  • Applicability of ICN as protocol substrate for Web3 and other decentralized approaches to Internet applications.
  • Continuing refinement of ICN protocols for IoT and edge computing
  • Interaction of ICN with work on in-network computing, particularly programming of networking devices as being investigated in COINRG

Dirk Kutscher noted that the engagement level in ICNRG is way down; participation at virtual interim meetings and the annual ACM conference is stagnant to modestly declining. Some of this might be organic decline as the ICN research area is maturing (9 years since formation of ICNRG, 11+ years overall), but most of this is likely due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Research collaboration is very sensitive to in-person interaction both within and across teams, and the ability to forge new relationships or kick off new research topics is seriously degraded because video conferencing is notoriously inadequate for this. It is unlikely that either chairs or most active participants will be going to Vienna in person for IETF 113.

The current plan for ICNRG is to keep pushing mature documents through to publication and continue working on other adopted topics on the mailing list and in virtual interim meetings. They will continue to push for increased engagement from the ICN community with other IRTF efforts such as COINRG. They will also try for increased focus on distributed computing pieces. There is a new attempt on the mailing list to investigate the relationship of ICN to recent discussions in IETF and IRTF about centralization and the push for decentralized Internet services and applications. Once the pandemic has waned, they will see if the resumption of in-person activities re-energizes the community and reassess where they are.

4. IESG Slate Confirmation

Via e-vote, the IAB confirmed the IESG slate presented by the IETF NomCom.

Zhenbin Li recused himself from the discussion and consideration of the Routing Area Director.

5. IAB Open Meeting at IETF 113

The IAB discussed the IAB Open Meeting at IETF 113. Jared Mauch and David Schinazi both said that they are planning to be in Vienna and can co-chair with Mirja Kühlewind, conflicts permitting.

Mirja Kühlewind said that the agenda would include updates from the AID Workshop and the EDM Program, and asked whether a one-hour slot was still appropriate.

Jari Arkko noted that the IAB might want to consider an agenda topic on architectural contributions from outside the IAB or an IAB Program. The IAB agreed, but decided that a one-hour slot would still be appropriate, given the constraints of a mostly-online hybrid meeting.

6. Executive Session: Independent Submissions Editor Appointment

The Independent Submissions Editor appointment was discussed in an executive session.