Skip to main content

Minutes IETF114: dispatch: Mon 10:00
minutes-114-dispatch-202207251000-00

The information below is for an old version of the document.
Meeting Minutes Dispatch (dispatch) WG Snapshot
Date and time 2022-07-25 14:00
Title Minutes IETF114: dispatch: Mon 10:00
State Active
Other versions markdown
Last updated 2022-07-25

minutes-114-dispatch-202207251000-00

DISPATCH Hybrid Meeting @IETF-114

Monday 25 July 2022

Room: Liberty C, Ballroom

10:00-12:00 UTC-4

Log into the IETF datatracker to access:

DISPATCH Meeting

Status and Agenda Bash - Chairs and ADs (10 min)

Some queuing issues through MeetEcho - queue to be manually managed.

Binary Application Record Encoding (BARE) (20 min)

Presenter: Jiri Vlasak

draft-devault-bare-07

Messages

Richard Barnes: supportive of a small focused WG to align this work with
TLS syntax and address the difference.
Eric Rescorla: Which large community wish to use this technology?
Jiri Vlasak: Some researchers also want to use.
Kirsty: not the size of the company that is important, the number of
implementors is more important.
Cullen Jennings: It would be useful to build it in IETF.
Barry Leiba: Agree with Eric. The overhead to standardise it in IETF is
high. We need to be sure that we need it. I would support discussing it
in CBOR. Highly recommend that it is not AD Sponsored for the work like
this as the pre AD.
John Klensin: Agree with Barry. IRTF or Design team gather all the
formats and study.
David Schinazi: Don't see the reason to proceed in IETF until people are
interested in implementing this.
Kirsty: We need to see more interests/adoption/support rather than only
one company.

Dispatch outcome: possible WG or discussion forum on this topic, as it
repeatedly comes up, but not necessarily this proposal - needs to be
more widely applicable than only one company (possibly this is why it
has not been standardised thus far, because it is company-specific).
Therefore: find more supporters and then return with this proposal (and
possibly others) for WG-scoping.

Transparently decrypting URIs (20 min)

Presenter: Bron Gondwana

Slides

Messages

Ted Hardie: Scope question - what is the scope?
Bron: If you get a copy of the URI, you are Party B; if not, you are
Party C. There can be any number of these parties.
Ted Hardie: Think a draft needs writing for proper assessment.
John Levine: not a new problem, have this issue going back 20 years.
When email was medium-sized, we evolved and now it's even bigger. Trying
to invent a new URI format would give heartburn.
Bron: don't want to do it at the level, so would prefer to do it at a
different library.
John: Think it's worth doing, people do pass email attachments around at
a hacky level, but need more detail to assess. Don't think an email WG
is the right place.
Eric Rescorla: Generally worth doing. HTTP is a good fit, seems like it
belongs - or else will have to be a new group.
Mark Nottingham: Area prone to over-engineering if we're not careful.

Dispatch outcome: Work is worth doing, more specifics need detailing
so that the work can be properly assessed and sent to the right place.
Some hear S/MIME similarities, others hear HTTP. Return with a draft for
the work to progress.

Privacy Considerations for Web Feed Readers (20 min)

Presenter: Mark Nottingham

draft-nottingham-feed-privacy-00

Messages

Paul Hoffman: Surprised not to see more support. This is good - adding
privacy, even talking about privacy - this is a good thing. RSS feeds
are still around - would make sense to improve this poor current state.

Jabber shows support for getting folks thinking about RSS feeds more.

Dispatch outcome: Creation of a non-WG mailing list on this topic
(possibly feeds@ ietf, not only privacy-focused).

New UUID Formats (20 min)

Presenter: Kyzer Davis

draft-peabody-dispatch-new-uuid-format-04

Messages

David Schinazi: This is exactly what we would like to hear. I would like
to see this published, it seems useful. Dispatch opinion is that
AD-sponsorship would be the simplest way forward, or a tightly scoped WG
with one deliverable would work.
Cullen Jennings: Forming a WG to support UUIDs, lots of subtle
complexities. Having a long-term place for these updates would be
helpful, why things are the way they are would be helpful. Lots of
errata on those drafts, wow! We should be maintaining those better.
Favour of a WG group.
Alissa Cooper: Agree with Barry not AD Sponsored.
Eric Rescorla: It should be focused WG.
Murray: Who want to help charter? I can take the AD role.

Dispatch outcome: Weak support for a WG forming; take to dispatch
mailing list to find volunteers to form a charter for this - will
discuss and work out whether it's a small, tightly-focused WG on one
draft or a longer-term care-taker for UUIDs and maintenance.

Discarding Priority of RTP Video Packets (10 min)

Presenter: Lijun Dong

draft-dong-priority-rtp-packet-00

Messages

Mo Zanaty: These are two separate problems. One is the priority in the
RTP header. The other is to map to the DSCP, then that goes to TSV area.

Pete Resnick: People who can evaluate this are in AVTCore, dispatch
should be to send there for assessment. Someone said on Jabber perhaps
TSVwg could take on the DSCP bits.
Magnus Westerland: Perhaps you could take this to AVTCore. Multi-stream
aspect of this makes doing this across all media streams blindly
non-optimised! What are you trying to accomplish here? But AVTCore is a
good place to discuss RTP and usage.
Lijun: Want to use those bits in the network layer when congestion
happens, instead of randomly discarding packets, if the router can know
which packet is better for decoding, maybe it's better to expose those
bits.
Magnus: You still need to explain the application, because it's not
clear that this is the best way to achieve that.
Mo Zanaty: You don't want restrict yourself to Layer 2, DSCP. Look at
WiFi, upstream priorities, mobile networks, RANs etc. DSCP is not going
to give a lot of benefits, especially since it's not carried through
interoperably. If you really want to optimise, you have to do it across
layers and give guidance at each layer.
Lijun: I agree that DSCP has the remarking issue that won't be carried
end to end.
Mirja Kuhlewind: You need to show not only the use case, but that this
is an improvement on the current performance. Show what you gain. TSVWG
and AVTCore are fine places to go.
Mirja Kuhlewind: ECN also reflects the network congestion.
Omer Shapira: From Apple. UDP is not sensitive reordering.
Lijun: I am aware of this issue.
Toreless: There are results to show the benefits of dropping packets of
video.
Jonathan Lennox: AVTCore chair, agrees it's in scope for AVTCore and
TSVWG do the DSCP part.

Dispatch outcome: The use case needs clarifying, and that gains in
performance need demonstrating (also from the list). Update these
aspects, and take to AVTCore and TSVWG for the DSCP-specific aspects.

Summary - DISPATCH outcomes

BARE dispatch outcome: possible WG or discussion forum on this topic,
as it repeatedly comes up, but not necessarily this proposal - needs to
be more widely applicable than only one company (possibly this is why it
has not been standardised thus far, because it is company-specific).
Therefore: find more supporters and then return with this proposal (and
possibly others) for WG-scoping.

Transparently decrypting URIs dispatch outcome: Work is worth doing,
more specifics need detailing so that the work can be properly assessed
and sent to the right place. Some hear S/MIME similarities, others hear
HTTP. Return with a draft for the work to progress.

Web Feed Reader dispatch outcome: Creation of a non-WG mailing list on
this topic (possibly feeds@ ietf, not only privacy-focused).

UUID dispatch outcome: Weak support for a WG forming; take to dispatch
mailing list to find volunteers to form a charter for this - will
discuss and work out whether it's a small, tightly-focused WG on one
draft or a longer-term care-taker for UUIDs and maintenance.

Discarding Priority of RTP Video Packets dispatch outcome:
Dispatch outcome: The use case needs clarifying, and that gains in
performance need demonstrating (also from the list). Update these
aspects, and take to AVTCore and TSVWG for the DSCP-specific aspects.

ART AREA Meeting


BoFs, updates and meetings of interest - ADs (10 min)

Murray Kucherawy presenting on ART area topics, including:

  • a clarification on the errata process and a call for help - please
    help out with processing errata.
  • please volunteer to be a document shepherd, IANA requests, working
    group chairs, etc.
  • review team members - contact Barry Leiba to volunteer, about 1-5
    per year
  • i18ndir

Flextime & AOB (10 min)

MIMI side meeting & SPIN draft: IETF has been working for decades on
interoperability between app-to-app video calls, messaging,
conferencing. None of that works because of business commercial reasons,
but the Digital Markets Act might change things and that's why MIMI is
being formed.
Draft:
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-rosenberg-dispatch-spin-00.txt

Meeting at 4pm today in the Philadelphia South room, mezzanine level.