Skip to main content

Minutes IETF 99 BOF coordination interim-2017-iesg-12 2017-06-07 15:00

Meeting Minutes Internet Engineering Steering Group (iesg) IETF
Date and time 2017-06-07 15:00
Title Minutes IETF 99 BOF coordination interim-2017-iesg-12 2017-06-07 15:00
State (None)
Other versions plain text
Last updated 2024-02-23

Minutes of the IESG/IAB BoF Coordination Teleconference IETF 99
7 June 2017

Reported by: Amy Vezza, IETF Secretariat

Additional reference materials available at the BoF Wiki 

Jari Arkko / IAB
Alia Atlas / Routing Area
Ignas Bagdonas / Scribe
Deborah Brungard / Routing Area
Spencer Dawkins / Transport Area
Mat Ford / ISOC
Ted Hardie / IAB Chair
Joe Hildebrand / IAB
Lee Howard / IAB
Suresh Krishnan / Internet Area
Mirja Kuehlewind / Transport Area
Warren Kumari / Operations and Management Area
Terry Manderson / Internet Area
Stephanie McCammon / IETF Secretariat
Alexey Melnikov / Applications and Real-Time Area
Cindy Morgan / IETF Secretariat 
Kathleen Moriarty / Security Area
Erik Nordmark / IAB
Mark Nottingham / IAB
Eric Rescorla / Security Area
Alvaro Retana / Routing Area
Martin Thomson / IAB
Brian Trammell / IAB
Amy Vezza / IETF Secretariat
Suzanne Woolf / IAB


Alissa Cooper / IETF Chair, General Area
Ben Campbell / Applications and Real-Time Area
Benoit Claise / Operations and Management Area
Susan Hares / Scribe
Allison Mankin / IRTF Chair
Gabriel Montenegro / IAB
Adam Roach / Applications and Real-Time Area
Robert Sparks / IAB 
Jeff Tantsura / IAB






o 5G IP Access and Session Management Protocols (5GIP)
 Responsible AD: Suresh Krishnan

Suresh Krishan introduced the 5GIP BoF, and stated that 
the BoF proponents have been having side meetings for a 
number of meeting cycles. He also mentioned there was a 
wide range of topics being discussed on the mailing list, 
but there has been no convergence in topics, and no 
narrowing of the scope. He worried the group would not 
be able to identify and agree on a clear list of topics.

Ted Hardie also expressed concern about the lack of concrete 
topics for specific work items.

Suresh mentioned if others felt the meeting would be helpful, 
he'd be open to a non-wg forming BoF, but would not recommend 
charter discussion.

Alia Atlas also expressed concern on overlap with other work 
and lack of clarity on the description of work items. She 
also mentioned that they had been meeting for a year with 
little progress towards getting work chartered.

Jari Arkko also expressed concern over the overlap into 3GPP 

Ted agreed with Jari and added that it might be useful to have 
an information session talk on the work 3GPP is doing.

Suresh agreed it might be useful. The BANANA BoF had a similar 
issue with BBF, but they solved it by inviting someone from 
BBF to talk about the work being done. 

Martin Thomson asked if there had been any coordination efforts 
on division of labor between 3GPP and the BoF proponents. When 
it was clear there had not been, he suggested an education 
session on which group would be responsible for which work item.

Spencer Dawkins asked how many people had been attending the 
side meetings for the last year. Suresh answered that around 
50 people had come to the meetings.

Eric Rescorla asked what would be the goal from the perspective 
of the broader community.

Spencer mentioned that experts in other areas, who haven't been 
involved in repeated side meetings, might help bring this proposal 
into focus.

There was a discussion on whether a BoF at IETF 99 would do 
any good to focus the topic to something useful in regards to 
BoF or future WG.

Jari added that perhaps instead of a BoF, there could be an 
information session on 5G that doesn't push any specific topic 
or solution. He mentioned there would be risks that attendees 
might come into the session with
specific solutions.

Suresh mentioned that with so little progress towards chartered 
work over the last year that an information session with 3GPP 
might bring some clarity to scope the issues for the IETF.

Kathleen Moriarty added that a number of BoFs took time to change 
direction after a first session to focus on what work can be done 
in the IETF and what work would be better served elsewhere.

Erik Nordmark said they need to identify specifics; perhaps a hard 
reset on priorities would be helpful before a BoF session is approved.

Suresh agreed, and added he would take an action item to find 
and IAB BoF shepherd to assist them in separating work for the IETF 
from other SDOs areas.

The 5GIP BoF was not approved for IETF 99. 


o BANdwidth Aggregation for Network Access (BANANA)
 Responsible AD: Suresh Krishnan

Suresh Krishnan remarked this will be the second BoF on this 
subject, but the BoF proponents have made improvements and 
progress since the last BoF was held. He also mentioned a 
concern of whether the work was of interest to the wider 
IETF community.

Brian Trammell added that the issues raised last time regarding 
overlapping work being done in BBF. He mentioned that the problem 
was solved and the danger of conflict was fixed.

Mirja Kuehlewind noted that the non-WG forming BoF had a lot 
of interest, but she wasn't sure if the interest would transfer 
to a WG or a WG-forming BoF.

Suresh recommended approving the BoF effort as a non-WG forming 
BoF. There were no objections. The BANANA BoF was approved for 
a 1.5 hour agenda session slot at IETF 99.


o Network Slicing (NETSLICING)
 Responsible AD: Benoit Claise

Warren Kumari mentioned since Benoit Claise could not make the 
call, he would stand in as they had discussed the Networking 
Slicing BoF proposal together. He said the email list was active, 
and there was progress toward converging ideas. However, they 
had some concerns about identifying what the issues were, and 
if everyone was working with the same set of definitions for terms.

Warren also mentioned that they were concerned there were other 
working groups already working on the issues in the proposed charter. 
Warren indicated that Benoit was leaning toward approving a two 
hour non-WG forming BoF for the group. 

Jari Arkko mentioned this work may be premature for 5G, but a 
properly scoped BoF might be useful.

Spencer Dawkins agreed and added that the final result, what work 
is chartered and which working groups it's chartered in would not 
matter as long as there were answers to the questions being discussed.

Erik Nordmark stated that the gap analysis for the work seemed too 
broad to be useful. He wasn't sure how to focus on one aspect, 
but mentioned it would be necessary.

Terry Manderson agreed there wasn't clarity on what questions the 
BoF was looking to answer. He was worried about how much seemed to 
be dismissed as not relevant. Terry was reluctant to grant them 
time without more concrete information. He also mentioned an IAB 
shepherd might help provide guidance for architectural structure.

Warren confirmed that at this point it would be a non-WG forming 
BoF, and they planned to ask the IETF 3GPP liaison to chair the 

Terry reiterated his concern about the proponents not understanding what
the landscape is, and suggested bringing in someone new to chair the
session instead.

Warren agreed that would be useful. He wanted to have a session to 
bring everyone together to document what exists in this space and 
agree on what would be useful, and what would be completely out of 

There was a brief discussion on the people who might be beneficial 
to chair the session. Both Eric Rescorla and Ted Hardie expressed 
concern for the success of a BoF session at IETF 99. 

Warren agreed that it could go either way, but he wanted to have 
the BoF to see if anything useful came out of it. He mentioned a 
non-WG forming BoF might help clarify if there is work in this space 
for the IETF.  He would welcome BoF Chair suggestions from the IESG 
and IAB.

The NETSLICING BoF was approved for a 2 hour agenda session slot at 
IETF 99.


o IDentity Enabled Networks (IDEAS)
 Responsible AD: Alvaro Retana

Alvaro Retana introduced the IDEAS BoF and mentioned he was inclined 
to approve the BoF effort, as he found the problem statement useful. 
The goal of the BoF was to define a framework that could be used by 
different protocols, i.e. LISP or ILA.

Jari Arkko noted that the current description of the BoF proposal 
felt commercially driven, and wanted the discussion to be about how 
to solve the problems without influence.

Ted Hardie wanted to know if Alvaro would want an IAB Shepherd to 
assist the BoF proponents and chairs.

Alvaro responded in the affirmative, and Erik Nordmark agreed to 
act as IAB Shepherd and assist in narrowing the scope of the BoF 

Erik mentioned some concerns with the descriptions for the work not 
being clear. 

Spencer Dawkins wondered how much of what they were discussing was 
research and how much was engineering.

Eric Rescorla stated it would be useful to know what deployed 
protocols would use this work.

The IESG and IAB agreed the BoF effort would be useful. The IDEAS 
BoF was approved for a 1.5 hour agenda session slot at IETF 99.