* WGs marked with an * asterisk has had at least one new draft made available during the last 5 days

Timeframe IETF 97 (Seoul)

Current schedule of "Important Dates" requires that all BOF proposal requests be submitted to Area Directors (ADs) by 2359 UTC Friday, 2016-09-30. The IAB and IESG will hold a joint teleconference to discuss the proposals. ADs will be expected to approve or disapprove the BOF request on that teleconference, ensuring that the Secretariat has all of the information to put the first draft of the agenda together on or before 2016-10-14.

Applications and Real-Time

General

Internet

BANdwidth Aggregation for interNet Access (BANANA) - Approved for IETF 97

  • Description:

This BOF will discuss how we can take advantage of multiple access links, provided by one or more access providers, in cases where end nodes and applications may not be multi-access-aware. Use of multiple access links could provide bandwidth aggregation when multiple links are available (i.e. improved performance), and session continuation when a link becomes unavailable (i.e. increased reliability).

Solutions to this problem are intended to apply to home and small-office networks, so solutions must support load-sharing of a small number of flows (in some cases only one) over multiple paths, recombining the traffic in ways that do not cause problems for the network (i.e. congestion, multi-level retransmission, etc.) or for upper-layer protocols (i.e. packet reordering within flows). Solutions in this area must allow for some traffic to bypass bandwidth aggregation (e.g. for flows that are mandated to travel a specific path, or for flows that are already using a more end-to-end bandwidth aggregation solution). Solutions should provide minimal (if any) performance degradation when multiple links are not available, or when one or more of the links is not performing sufficiently to support increased performance to the end nodes.

This is a Non-WG-forming BOF. The purposes of the BOF are to discuss the problem space, and determine if there is sufficient interest and energy in the IETF to pursue any work in this area. If the interest and energy exist, further effort may be exerted to scope and charter an IETF WG.

There has been an informal group, also called BANANA, looking at a subset of this space: the case where multiple links are provided by a single Internet access provider/operator. Multiple solutions that could apply to this subset have been discussed within that group, including: a MIP-Based Solution (draft-ietf-dmm-mag-multihoming), an MPTCP Proxy-based solution (merged draft forthcoming), a GRE Tunnel Bonding Solution (draft-zhang-gre-tunnel-bonding), and a 3GPP-specific solution (draft-muley-bonding-solution-hybrid-access). The MIP-based solution was developed in the DMM WG and is proposed for publication as a Standards Track RFC. The GRE Tunnel Bonding solution, proposed for publication as an Independent Stream RFC, has been deployed by Deutsche Telecom in a large-scale operational network. The MPTCP solution, though not yet fully documented, presents a promising, minimal-overhead solution, especially for situations where it is only necessary to share TCP traffic between multiple links. There are significant differences between these proposals, resulting in different technical trade-offs, many of which have been explored in the BANANA Considerations Draft (draft-mrc-banana-considerations). Some of the solutions that have been under discussion may apply (with or without additional signaling mechanisms) to the broader problem space where the access links may not be provided by a single operator. This ongoing work will be discussed during the BOF, as it applies to the more general problem.

There has also been ongoing work in multiple other standards organizations to describe related problems. The Broadband Forum has produced a “Hybrid Access” problem statement for DSL/LTE bandwidth aggregation specifically for the case where the DSL and LTE links are provided by a single operator (TR-348). Documents from the other groups are not yet publicly available.

Bundled Domains (DNSBUNDLED) - Approved for IETF 97

  • Description: Bundled Domain will work on a DNS solution for fully mapping one domain name to another domain name. With the emergence of internationalized domain names and new TLDs, it is often useful to redirect one domain name tree fully to another domain name tree. Current DNS protocols have not provided such ability to satisfy these requirements.
  • Links to the mailing list: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?email_list=bundled-domain-names
  • Problem Statement: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-yao-bundled-name-problem-statement/
  • Status: NON-WG-forming
  • The responsible Area Director (AD): Terry Manderson (Alexey Melnikov as backup)
  • BoF Chairs (or the ADs as placeholders): James Galvin and Ning Kong
  • Number of people expected to attend: 100
  • Length of session: 1.5 hours
  • Conflicts to avoid (first priority): RegExt, Dnsop, DNSExt, dnssd, dprive, dispatch, intarea, lager, acme, tls and httpbis
  • Conflicts to avoid (second priority): homenet, ianaplan

IP Wireless Access in Vehicular Environments (ipwave) - Approved for IETF 97

  • Description: Automobiles and vehicles of all types are increasingly connected to the Internet. Comfort-enhancing entertainment applications, road safety applications using bidirectional data flows, and connected automated driving are but a few new features expected in automobiles to hit the roads from now to year 2020.
  • Links to the mailing list: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?&email_list=its
  • Draft Charter: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-ipwave/
  • Status: Expect WG Charter approval before IETF 97
  • The responsible Area Director (AD): Suresh Krishnan
  • BoF Chairs: Russ Housley
  • Number of people expected to attend: 100
  • Length of session: 1.5 hours
  • Conflicts to avoid (first priority): intarea, 6lo, 6MAN, manet, rtgarea, saag, stir, lamps
  • Conflicts to avoid (second priority): CFRG, 6lo, DHC, roll, ospf, isis, lime

IPv6 over Low Power Wide-Area Networks (lpwan) - Approved for IETF 97

  • Placeholder for a WG in formation
  • Responsible AD: Suresh Krishnan
  • Chairs: Alexander Pelov <​a@ackl.io>; Pascal Thubert <​pthubert@cisco.com>
  • Number of people expected to attend:140[[BR]]
  • Length of session: 2 hours
  • Conflicts to avoid:
    First Priority: 6tisch core 6lo roll detnet t2trg intarea
    Second Priority: 6man anima cose ace lwig
    Third Priority: netconf manet
  • Links for more info: https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/lpwan/charter/

Operations and Management

  • Name: Layer Two VPN Service Model (L2SM) - Approved for IETF 97
  • Status: Placeholder BoF. (Hope to be formed as a WG before the BoF call. Make sure a slot for it is requested in Seoul.)
  • Description: This WG would work to produce a single YANG model to describe a L2VPN service on the interface between a customer and a service provider. The WG is shaped very similar to the successful L3SM. A stake in the ground exists as https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wen-l2sm-l2vpn-service-model/ Issue to be resolved is relationship with MEF
  • The responsible Area Director (AD): Benoit Claise and Joel Jaeggli
  • Mailing list: l2sm@ietf.org (recently created)
  • BoF Chairs (or the ADs as placeholders): ADs to choose.
  • Proposers: Adrian Farrel (adrian@olddog.co.uk) and Qin Wu (bill.wu@huawei.com)
  • Number of people expected to attend: 60
  • Length of session: 1.5 hr
  • Conflicts to avoid: opsawg, netmod, netconf, i2nsf, bess, pals, idr, rtgwg
  • Name: IP Provisioning for SDN/NFV (ipprov) - Not Approved for IETF 97
  • Description: With the dynamic nature of SDN/NFV networks, providers and data center operators have to manage more dynamically the IP addressing and provisioning of network nodes, including various network transition scenarios such as IPv4 as a service, where IP address and prefixes consumption are critical and require timely and dynamic reallocations. An initial set of providers have expressed requirements, but with different scopes (eg: only IP addressing and prefix management and delegation, vs larger provisioning scope). Some initial prototyping of solutions and field trial has started. The intent of the bof is to gather a common set of requirements from a larger set of operators and, if needed, possible protocol work milestones and scope.
  • Status: not WG-forming
  • Drafts: draft-xie-ps-centralized-address-management draft-sun-i2apm-address-pool-management-arch draft-sun-i2apm-address-pool-management-yang
  • The responsible Area Director (AD): OPS
  • BoF Chairs (or the ADs as placeholders): Marc Blanchet and ...
  • Proponents: Chongfeng Xie(CT), Ying Cheng(CU)
  • Number of people expected to attend: 100
  • Length of session: 1.5 hour
  • Conflicts to avoid (first priority): sdnrg, nfv, intarea, nfvrg, opsawg, anima
  • Conflicts to avoid (second priority): dtn, sunset4

Routing

Security

  • Name: Security Events (SECEVENT) - Approved for IETF 97
  • Description: See charter
  • Links to the mailing list: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?email_list=id-event
  • Status: Placeholder BoF. (Should be formed as a WG before the BoF call. Make sure a slot for it is requested in Seoul.)
  • The responsible Area Director (AD): Kathleen Moriarty (Alexey Melnikov as backup)
  • BoF Chairs (or the ADs as placeholders): ?
  • Number of people expected to attend: 30
  • Length of session: 1 hr
  • Conflicts to avoid: Saag, jsonbis, httpbis, dispatch, OAuth, tokbind ?

Transport

IAB Sessions