Internet Architecture Board


IAB Minutes 2022-06-15

Home»Documents»Minutes»Minutes 2022»IAB Minutes 2022-06-15

Minutes of the 2022-06-15 IAB Business Meeting

1. Administrivia

1.1. Attendance

  • Jari Arkko
  • Deborah Brungard
  • Lars Eggert (IETF Chair)
  • Liz Flynn (IETF Secretariat)
  • Cullen Jennings
  • Mallory Knodel
  • Mirja Kühlewind (IAB Chair)
  • Zhenbin Li
  • Cindy Morgan (IAB Executive Administrative Manager)
  • Karen O’Donoghue (ISOC Liaison)
  • Tommy Pauly
  • Colin Perkins (IRTF Chair)
  • David Schinazi
  • Sabrina Tanamal (IANA Liaison)
  • Russ White
  • Greg Wood (IETF Director of Communications and Operations)
  • Qin Wu
  • Jiankang Yao
  • Wes Hardaker
  • Warren Kumari (IESG Liaison)
  • Eliot Lear (Independent Submissions Editor)
  • Mark McFadden

1.2. Agenda bash and announcements

An agenda item on the proposed IAB-ISOC Administrative Support Group was added to the agenda, time permitting.

1.3. Meeting Minutes

The following meeting minutes were approved:

  • 2022-06-01 business meeting – (posted 2022-06-01)

1.4. Action item review

  • 2022-04-20: Mirja Kühlewind and the Liaison Coordinators to continue discussions on how to refine the liaison tool and approval process.
  • 2022-04-20: Karen O’Donoghue to draft a description for an IAB-ISOC Administrative Support Group.
  • 2022-05-04: Wes Hardaker, Deborah Brungard, and Qin Wu to interview RSWG Chair candidates.
  • 2022-05-19: Jari Arkko, Wes Hardaker, Cullen Jennings, Mallory Knodel, and Russ White to review draft-iab-protocol-maintenance.
  • 2022-06-01: Cindy Morgan to send out a call for feedback on the CCG appointment.
  • 2022-06-01: Cindy Morgan to set up the IETF-IEEE 802 Administrative Support Group in the Datatracker.
  • 2022-06-01: Mirja Kühlewind to set up a meeting with the people interested in working on the ISTS workshop proposal.
  • 2022-06-01: Jari Arkko to review the retreat notes for additional action items.
  • 2022-06-01: Mirja Kühlewind to find a co-chair for the IAB Open session at IETF 114.
  • 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.
  • 2021-09-01: Jari Arkko to continue editing the document on the role of discovery in ensuring that Internet technology is broadly
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.
  • 2021-11-17: Mirja Kühlewind and Cindy Morgan to put together some options for the IAB Website revamp for the IAB to review.
  • 2021-09-08: Liaison Coordinators to come up with a list of potential candidates to reach out to for future IAB-appointed
  • 2022-04-13: Liaison Coordinators/Liaison Managers to document how the liaison role works for their respective SDOs.
  • 2022-04-13: Liaison Coordinators to find out where liaison managers are having trouble accessing documents for their liaising
  • 2022-05-11: Wes Hardaker to reach out to the SAT BOF proponents and ADs re BOF shepherding.
  • 2022-05-20: Cullen Jennings to look into a possible IAB Technical Discussion on Internet user identity in Internet communications applications. (Goal: 2022-07-13)
  • 2022-05-20: Mirja Kühlewind and Tommy Pauly to progress the ISTS workshop proposal.
  • 2022-05-20: Jari Arkko and Lars Eggert to progress the “Measuring the environmental impact of Internet Applications and Systems” workshop proposal.
  • 2022-06-15: Jari Arkko to start a discussion about whether the IAB should pick up draft-nottingham-avoiding-internet-centralization on the IAB Stream.
  • 2022-06-15: Mirja Kühlewind to check with Robert Sparks/Tools Team on how to document the proposed changes to the liaison tool and approval process.
  • 2022-06-15: David Schinazi to work with Martin Thomson on a new revision to draft-iab-protocol-maintenance that incorporates the feedback received to date.

1.5. IAB Document Status Update


  • draft-iab-aid-workshop-01
    IAB State: Community Review ends 2022-06-28
  • draft-iab-mnqeu-report-02
    IAB State: Active IAB Document
  • draft-iab-path-signals-collaboration-00
    IAB State: Active IAB Document
  • draft-iab-protocol-maintenance-07
    IAB State: Active IAB Document
  • draft-iab-rfc7991bis-04
    I-D Exists
  • draft-iab-rfcefdp-rfced-model-13
    RFC Editor Queue: RFC-EDITOR

1.6. WG Chartering in Progress


  • Source Address Validation in Intra-domain and Inter-domain
    Networks (SAVNET)
    External Review (on agenda of 2022-06-16 IESG telechat)

1.7. Proposed BOFs


  • bofreq-birkholz-supply-chain-integrity-transparency-and-trust-scitt-10
    Supply Chain Integrity, Transparency, and Trust (SCITT)
    IAB Shepherds: Jari Arkko, David Schinazi
  • bofreq-danyliw-tigress-01
    Transfer dIGital cREdentialS Securely (TIGRESS)
    IAB Shepherd: Not requested (placeholder for WG to be chartered)
  • bofreq-moskowitz-scvp-validation-request-tls-extension-00
    SCVP Validation Request TLS Extension (VRTE)
    IAB Shepherd: Not requested
  • bofreq-hardie-media-over-quic-03
    Media Over QUIC (MOQ)
    IAB Shepherd: Not requested
  • bofreq-lemon-stub-network-auto-configuration-for-ipv6-04
    Stub Network Auto Configuration for IPv6 (SNAC)
    Status: Approved
    IAB Shepherd: Jari Arkko, Russ White
  • bofreq-miller-json-web-proofs-00
    JSON Web Proofs
    IAB Shepherd: Not requested
  • bofreq-hardjono-secure-asset-transfer-protocol-04
    Secure Asset Transfer Protocol (SAT)
    IAB Shepherd: Wes Hardaker
  • bofreq-liu-multicast-source-routing-over-ipv6msr6-13
    Multicast Source Routing over IPv6 (MSR6)
    IAB Shepherds: Deborah Brungard, Russ White

2. Sync Up with Independent Submissions Editor

The IAB met with Eliot Lear, who took over as the Independent Submissions Editor (ISE) in February 2022.

According to RFC 4846, the Independent Stream publishes:

  • Informational discussions of technologies, options, or experience with protocols
  • April 1st RFCs and other humor
  • Informational publication of vendor-specific protocols
  • Discussion of Internet-related technologies that are not part of the IETF agenda
  • Introduction of important new ideas as a bridge publication venue between academia and IETF engineering
  • Critiques and discussions of alternatives to IETF Standards-Track protocols and processes
  • Documents considered by IETF Working Groups but not standardized
  • Meeting notes and reports
  • Eulogies

Eliot Lear noted that the ISE’s evaluation standards vary based on the category of document.

Eliot Lear said that as ISE, his priorities are interoperability, levity, and continuous improvement. He noted that levity (i.e. the April 1st RFCs) can be challenging, as it can be difficult to convey tone over text and there are different cultural sensitivities in an international audience, but he does think it important to provide levity when appropriate.

For the concept of continuous improvement, Eliot Lear presented three cases. Two have been submitted to the ISE, and one has not landed in a Stream yet.

Case 1: draft-santesson-svt (Signature Validation Token) – submitted to the ISE

  • Signature Validity Token extends validity of a signature
  • Signatures will expire
  • Companies go out of business
  • CAs become inoperative for some reason
  • Algorithm agility that extends beyond the element in question

This document was discussed in the IETF Security Area, but not picked up by any of their Working Groups.

Case 2: draft-schanzen-gns (The GNU Name System) – submitted to the ISE

  • Alternative namespaces can pose both architectural and political challenges and opportunities
  • What happens if there are ambiguities?
  • Does the user get a meaningful choice?
  • Is there room for new forms of agency?
  • Where in our rubric to discuss this draft?
    • There used to be the Name Space Research Group in the IRTF, but that concluded in 2000.

Eliot Lear noted that it was not clear whether the ISE was the right place for this draft to be published.

Lars Eggert noted that this topic came up in the recent ICANN SSAC meeting, and that this document is not the only proposal in this space. He added that SSAC would like to have more discussion about this topic with the IAB.

Eliot Lear said that was good news, and suggested that the authors of this draft be invited to that discussion.

Colin Perkins noted that this draft was discussed in DINRG and also a few IETF WGs. He added that no one bringing work to the IRTF seems interested in making proposals on this topic.

Case 3: draft-nottingham-avoiding-internet-centralization (Centralization and Internet Standards) – no Stream decision yet

  • Examines the risks of decentralization as well as the benefits
  • Intersects more than just protocol aspects
    • Economics
    • Regulation
  • Discussed on architecture-discuss with lots of interest
  • DINRG might be a candidate group to consider this work
    • Workshop held in June of 2021
    • List has quiesced
  • DINPS Workshop attached to IEEE International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS) to be held in Bologna, IT in July

Eliot Lear noted that there has been discussion in the IAB about adopting this work.

Eliot Lear said that one of the challenges for the ISE is working with authors to figure out where work should proceed. After an initial evaluation (with lots of consultation), the ISE may decide to:

  • Progress the work on the Independent Stream
  • Suggest the work proceed on the IETF Stream
  • Suggest the work proceed on the IRTF Stream
  • Suggest the work proceed somewhere else
    • E.g. CACM, TPRC, NDSS, I2, RIRs, GÉANT, IEEE Computing Society, WEIS, IACR, IFIP, SIGCOMM, another SDO, etc.
  • Decline to progress the work

Eliot Lear said that his ultimate criteria is to do what he thinks will serve the community best. Making sure the work is well-reviewed is important; if he does not think that he can find the appropriate expertise to review the draft, he is unlikely to move it forward on the Independent Stream. He added that the ISE, IETF, and IRTF should take care to not continually pass the same work back and forth instead of progressing it.

Since taking over as ISE, Eliot Lear has adopted a Conflict of Interest Policy, added Martin Thomson to the Independent Submissions Editorial Board, and started requiring that authors recommend at least one reviewer with their submission.

3. Monthly Reports

3.1. IANA Liaison Report

–Begin IANA Liaison Report, Sabrina Tanamal–

IANA Services Liaison Report –  15 June 2022
SLA Deliverables Update:
ICANN met 100% of processing goal times for the April 2022 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:
IANA Services Operator and IETF Leadership Meeting Minutes from 7 April 
Summary of Meeting Minutes 
Thursday, April 7, 2022
Virtual interim meeting 
1730 UTC
Jari Arkko
Russ Housley
Lars Eggert
Mirja Kuehlewind
Kim Davies
Amy Creamer
Sabrina Tanamal
Michelle Thangtamsatid
Amanda Baber
Jay Daley is unable to attend.
1.    18 Nov 2019: IANA term usage (K. Davies, in progress)
	K. Davies: Objective is just to simplify/rationalize use of 
	terms like "IANA" and "PTI."
	L. Eggert: Trust leaned strongly in the direction of wanting to 
	be their own LLC. You probably want to look into the objective 
	risks from an ICANN/IANA perspective.
2.    26 Aug 2021: Complete the licensing issue (K. Davies, completed)
3.    10 Feb 2022: Including mailing lists in cc during AUTH48 (K. 
	Davies, completed)
• IANA Services Activity/Performance
  ○ November – February [error in slides; stats are Nov 21 – Jan 22] 
    with 100 percent processing times
  ○ Fiscal Year 2024 (FY24) Operating Plan and Budget
  ○ Initial engagement efforts for FY24 priorities is scheduled in May
  ○ Public Webinars will take place in July with invites sent to IETF 
    community and leadership
• Annual IANA Engagement Survey
2021 Survey saw an increase in IETF leadership participation. Survey 
looks at six facets -- credibility, transparency, attentiveness, 
fairness, timeliness, and accountability -- across naming, numbers, and 
protocol parameters. IANA usually ranks fairly well (4 or higher out of 
5) across the six concepts. Our ratings are consistently highest for the 
protocol parameter function.
• Operational Activities Updates
- Nameservers for the Address and Routing Parameter Area
  ○ (“arpa”) Domain approved for publication:
  ○ Implementation plans have been discussed with Verisign and is 
    scheduled for late April
- .INT Document
  ○ Currently in IETF Last Call

K. Davies: You would have seen that John Klensin had a substantial 
response, especially to the notion that RFC 1591 was appropriate to 
amend, given its status and legacy and the views others have. I think we 
should consider this carefully. Some of his review also speaks to IETF 
process questions. I'll respond to him about IANA-specific issues.

L. Eggert: There's a low-intensity ongoing discussion where a small part 
of the community questions whether the IETF/IESG can do anything with 
the status of RFCs in the legacy stream, suggesting they're out of 
control of the IETF. Although pragmatically, who else would be able to 
do this? We're hitting this with other documents as well. You can tell 
Warren that this aspect needs to be figured out on the IESG side.
-Licensing IANA Registries:
  ○ The statement has been posted at
  ○ Added the link to the protocol registries
- Registry workflow system
  ○ Estimated completion of development July 2022 for PEN application
- TZ Database: Editorial Dispute
  ○ A pseudo-fork has been created by Colebourne, but the fork merely 
    maps deltas from IANA source. Some downstream projects signaled they 
    will use the fork.
  ○ IANA is continuing to monitor the situation

K. Davies: The dispute is about an editorial philosophy concerning 
historical data. The IESG-designated expert and backup both take a 
minimalist view and have been stripping out some things they consider 
questionable. Others say not to take out old data unless it's 
demonstrably wrong. This has been flaring up on/off for years. This had 
been quiet in recent months, but just recently the main advocate for a 
maximalist approach has created a fork that has the deltas that can then 
be applied to the TZDB. Better than a full-blown fork. There are one or 
two downstream projects, possibly including FreeBSD, that have indicated 
that they're going to follow the fork. It appears that there is room for 
compromise, perhaps where the TZDB could include the fork, but that's my 
observation, and I'm not sure we have a role to play. We continue to 

R. Housley: Have you offered to host both files?

K. Davies: I have not. We've tried not to step into editorial disputes. 
But if that's a useful step, we can take it under consideration. But we 
don't want to be seen as taking sides.

R. Housley: I don't think the IESG want to step in either. It just seems 
less forky if they're in the same place.

K. Davies: Paul Eggert controls the whole repository, rather than giving 
us edits to apply. Two repos could sit with IANA.
  ○ Internal discussion prompted by the IETF turning down their FTP 
  ○ Plan on supporting FTP service for the foreseeable future
- IETF 112 Office Hours received 14 visits which included such topics as 
  discussion about I-Ds due to early reviews
• Upcoming Meeting Schedule
                ○ IESG/IAB Retreat

- Proposed IETF/IANA Meeting schedule:
  ○ In-Person or Virtual July 2022 (Philadelphia) – M. Kuehlewind asked 
    IANA to give an update to the IAB
  ○ In-Person or Virtual November 2022 (London)

–End IANA Liaison Report, Sabrina Tanamal–

3.2. IRTF Chair Report

–Begin IRTF Chair Report, Colin Perkins–

IRTF chair report to the IAB for the month ending 15 June 2022.

Research Groups

NMRG review with IAB took place on 1 June 2022.


ANRP award talks for IETF 114 will be given by Sam Kumar and Tushar 
Swamy. Details to be announced shortly


Taejoong (Tijay) Chung (Virginia Tech) and Marwan Fayed (Cloudflare) are 
co-chairing. There were fewer submissions than hoped, and discussion is 
ongoing to put together a reduced programme comprising peer-reviewed 
papers and invited talks.

Documents and Errata

With RFC Editor

• draft-irtf-icnrg-nrsarch-considerations
• draft-irtf-cfrg-spake2
• draft-irtf-icnrg-icn-lte-4g
• draft-irtf-nwcrg-coding-and-congestion
• draft-irtf-nwcrg-nwc-ccn-reqs

In IESG Conflict Review
• draft-irtf-nmrg-ibn-intent-classification
• draft-irtf-nmrg-ibn-concepts-definitions

In IRSG Final Poll
• draft-irtf-icnrg-ccninfo
• draft-irtf-pearg-numeric-ids-generation
• draft-irtf-pearg-numeric-ids-history
• draft-irtf-qirg-principles
• draft-irtf-cfrg-hash-to-curve (recently updated; ready for IESG 
  conflict review)

In IRSG Review
• draft-irtf-icnrg-icntraceroute
• draft-irtf-icnrg-icnping
• draft-irtf-nwcrg-bats

In IRTF Chair Review
• draft-irtf-hrpc-guidelines
• draft-irtf-cfrg-vrf

Other Activities

Diversity and ANRW travel grants in progress.

–End IRTF Chair Report, Colin Perkins–

3.3. RFC Editor Liaison Report

–Begin RFC Editor Liaison Report, John Levine–

The [Temporary RFC Series Project Manager] has been working with the 
RSOC on the transition to the new structure.  He has been participating 
in the recruitment process for the RSCE and it seems plausible if not 
overwhelmingly likely that we will find someone this year.

In the meantime he has turned his attention to the prep tool part of the 
XML publication process.  In principle the prep tool adds mechanically 
determined elements and attributes to an XML document to make it easier 
to render.  In reality what the prep tool RFC 7998 says and what xml2rfc 
does are somewhat different, and he is working to get a clear 
understanding of the differences so he can, along with the RFC's 
authors, advise where to change the code vs the spec.

–End RFC Editor Liaison Report, John Levine–

4. ISTS Workshop Proposal

This item was deferred to the agenda of the next IAB business meeting.

5. IAB-ISOC Policy Coordination Group

This item was deferred to the agenda of the next IAB business meeting.

6. Possible Executive Session: Process for 2022 RZERC appointment

This item was deferred to the agenda of the next IAB business meeting.

7. Next IAB Meeting

The next IAB business meeting will be on 2022-06-22 at 0700 PDT.