2016-06-08: Minutes
slides-interim-2021-ietfieee-05-sessa-2016-06-08-minutes-00

Corrections from Walter and Dan.

IAB, IESG and IEEE 802 Executive Committee
Minutes of the 8 June 2016 Virtual Meeting

Reported by: Cindy Morgan, IETF Secretariat

ATTENDEES
------------------- 
 Jari Arkko
 Alia Atlas
 Ed Beroset
 Spencer Dawkins  
 Ralph Droms
 Donald Eastlake
 Janos Farkas 
 Eric Gray
 Bob Grow
 Ted Hardie
 Bob Heile
 Joe Hildebrand
 Russ Housley
 Jouni Korhonen
 Suresh Krishnan
 Cindy Morgan 
 Paul Nikolich
 Erik Nordmark
 Glenn Parsons
 Walter Pienciak
 Jon Rosdahl
 Dan Romascanu  
 Dorothy Stanley  
 Pat Thaler   
 Robert Wilton
 Juan Carlos Zuniga


MINUTES
-------------------

1. Roll Call, Agenda Bashing, Minutes Approval

  The minutes of the 1 February 2016 meeting were approved.

2. Review of Other Action Items from Previous Meetings

 DONE:

  - Dan Romascanu to send out a Doodle poll to select the date for the 
    next face-to-face meeting. Depending on the results of that poll, 
    another Doodle may be sent out to schedule an additional 
    teleconference between now and the next face-to-face meeting.

3. Introduction of the new IESG, IAB and EC members

  Dan Romascanu welcomed everyone to the meeting and led a round of 
  introductions (see list of attendees, above).

4. 9/9/2016 Face to Face meeting - agenda, logistics

  Dan Romascanu reported that a hotel has been secured for the face-to-
  face meeting on 9 September 2016 near CDG in Paris. The instructions 
  for making hotel reservations should be sent to the list shortly.

  A draft agenda for the meeting has been posted at https://www.iab.org/
  wp-content/IAB-uploads/2013/01/ietf-ieee802-2016-09-09-agenda-00.txt.
 
  Suresh Krishnan and Juan Carlos Zuniga agreed to work with Pat Thaler 
  on the IoT agenda item. Glenn Parsons and Suresh Krishnan will work on 
  the "approaches to 5G standardization" agenda item.

5. July 2016 meetings 

  The group reviewed the expected IETF BOFs and IEEE 802 PARs under 
  consideration for their respective July meetings.

  o IETF BOFs (see http://trac.tools.ietf.org/bof/trac/wiki/WikiStart) 
    will be discussed for approval on 10 June 2016:

    - SIP Best-practice Recommendations Against Network Dangers to 
      privacY (SIPBRANDY)
    - Interledger (INTERLEDGER)
    - Glass to Glass Internet Ecosystem (GGIE) 
    - Meeting Venue (MTGVENUE) 
    - International Meeting Arrangements (IMTG) 
    - IPv6 over Low-Power Wide Area Networks (6LPWA) 
      o This may have overlap with some IEEE 802.15.4 work
    - Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) 
      o There is a standard-track document in the proposed charter that 
        is IPv6 over 802.11p. 
    - Babel routing protocol (BABEL) 
      o This work may have interactions with IEEE 802 eventually, but it 
        is not called out in the charter.
    - Limited Use of Remote Keys (LURK) 
    - Some PKIX and S/MIME (SPASM) 
    - Information Centric Networking Working Group (ICN)
    - Low Latency Low Loss Scalable throughput (L4S)
      o This may not interact with IEEE 802 directly, but may be of 
        interest to those who care about deterministic networking for 
        TCP traffic.
    - Quick UDP Internet Connections (QUIC)
      o This may be of interest to IEEE 802.
    - Path Layer UDP Substrate (PLUS)

  o IEEE 802 PARS (see http://www.ieee802.org/PARs.shtml):
    - 802.1Qcr, Asynchronous Traffic Shaping
    - 802.3 YANG model project
    - 802.15.12 - Amendment: Upper Layer Interface (ULI)
      o This will be relevant to IETF work.

  There may be other PARS coming up that have not been submitted yet.

  Additionally, a tutorial on emerging work in IEEE 802 is planned for 
  IETF 96.

6. YANG models for VLANs 

  Robert Wilton updated the group on the VLAN sub-interface YANG model. 
  There are two drafts under consideration; one has already been adopted 
  by NETMOD, but the other has not been adopted yet because there are 
  concerns with overlap in IEEE.

  The Proposed VLAN sub-interface YANG model:

  o Defines how to demux VLAN tagged traffic to independent IETF defined 
    services (IPv4, IPv6, L3VPN, PWs, VPLS, EVPN)
  o Many router vendors have proprietary configuration constructs 
    similar to what is being proposed in these two drafts
  o No standards exist for this technology in any standards body because 
    historically the end user configuration has not been standardized
  o However, there is now a strong market demand for automation via 
    standard YANG models (c.f. OpenConfig)
  o Without this draft (or equivalent), many IETF forwarding YANG models 
    (as above) cannot interoperate with VLAN tagged traffic
  o Members of NETMOD WG and IEEE 802.1 WG concerned with potential 
    overlap with 802.1Q technology and associated YANG models

  The IEEE 802.1Q bridge YANG model is derived from IEEE 802.1Q abstract 
  manageability model. It uses the 802.1Q defined forwarding paradigm, 
  and is implemented on 802.1Q bridge devices.

  The proposed Sub-interface VLAN YANG model is derived from core common 
  subset of existing vendor models for VLAN classification and demux to 
  sub-interfaces. Its forwarding paradigm is classification only, with 
  forwarding defined by separate IETF YANG models (IPv6, L3VPN, VPLS, 
  etc). It is implemented on routers with support for L3VPNs, PWs, VPLS, 
  etc.

  Some concerns were raised in the 802.1 WG presentation during the 
  802.1 interim meeting in May 2016:

  o The IETF model must interoperate with IEEE 802.1Q.
    - There is a proposed to update the draft to add constraints on tag 
      match and tag push ordering to address this.
  o The IETF model may fundamentally violate IEEE 802.1Q architecture.
    - This is awaiting further IEEE 802.1 WG discussion.
  o This may overlap with the 802.1Q host stack model.
    - 802.1Q doesn’t define host stack management interface. This is 
      awaiting IEEE 802.1 WG resolution. 
  o Flexible VLAN classification may put pressure on 802.1Q to implement 
    the same features.
    - The proposed IETF model has been used by many vendors for 10+ 
      years, hence is unlikely to be at risk from significant new 
      pressures now.
  o The model only allows configuration that can be efficiently 
    implemented.
    - The proposed model is implemented in hardware by multiple device 
      and ASIC vendors.
  o It may be better if the draft is Informational/Experimental rather 
    than Standards Track.
    - The proposal is to consult with the NETMOD WG chairs & AD about 
      this.

7. Areas of shared interest between the IETF and IEEE 802

  For more information, please see: 
  https://www.iab.org/wp-content/IAB-uploads/2013/01/Coordination_20.txt

 Item 3. IETF NVO3 and IEEE 802.1 DCB

  Pat Thaler reported that IEEE 802.1Qcn has an early draft now; more 
  content is expected before the July meeting, at which time it will be 
  liaised with NVO3. Pat Thaler and Alia Atlas took an action item to 
  talk to the NVO3 chairs about writing the YANG module for this 
  document.

 Item 5. Enabling use of Local Addresses for virtualization and IoT

  Pat Thaler reported that there is an initial version that is almost 
  ready to go to the working group on using the local address space in a 
  more structured way. Dan Romascanu noted that RFC 7042, "IANA 
  Considerations and IETF Protocol and Documentation Usage for IEEE 802 
  Parameters," may have relevance here. Donald Eastlake (one of the 
  authors of the RFC) said that he would send out a pointer to the 
  document, noting that some of the background information may need 
  updating.

 Item 11. IETF and IEEE 802.1 OmniRAN TG

  Dan Romascanu reported that the OmniRAN TG met at the 802 interim 
  meeting in May 2016. The document is expected to go to ballot after 
  the July 2016 meeting. Walter Pienciak noted that the IETF WG chairs 
  will need to personally request the document for review; it cannot be 
  sent to a list or put on a public website.


 Item 19. Common OAM proposal / Layer Independent OAM

  Dan Romascanu reported that the TRILL OAM is done, but the LIME work 
  continues. The YANG OAM model is not yet in Last Call; when it happens 
  comments from 802.1 will be welcome

 Item 21. 6tisch

  Bob Heile reported that most of the work on this is happening on the 
  IETF side, but Pascal Thubert was not able to join the call to provide 
  an update.

 Item 22. CAPWAP extensions in OPSAWG

  Dorothy Stanley noted that both of the drafts on the list are 
  currently expired, and that she is not sure whether there is any 
  further work expected on these drafts. Dan Romascanu and Dorothy 
  Stanley will check with Benoit Claise to see if any further work is 
  expected. If not, then this item will be closed.

 Item 24. Coordination between the IETF and IEEE 802 on Pervasive 
 Monitoring 

  Juan Carlos Zuniga reported that that the PAR was approved as 802E, 
  and will be handled by the 802.1 security group. Work continues, and a 
  draft is expected soon.
 
 Item 25. Layer2/Layer 3 Interaction for Time-Sensitive Traffic

  Pat Thaler reported that there was progress on this in the DetNet 
  working group, and a design team is working on the data plane. Jouni 
  Korhonen added that they are hoping to call for WG adoption of the 
  document in a few weeks.

 Item 27. Development of YANG models in the IEEE 802

  Dan Romascanu reported that this continues to progress and will likely 
  go to the YANG doctors for review; there is an agenda item to talk 
  about this further at the face-to-face meeting in September.

 Item 28. Multicast on IEEE 802 wireless networks

  Dorothy Stanley reported that the plan is to have an updated draft on 
  Multicast Considerations over IEEE 802 Wireless Media in time for the 
  July meeting, and then give an updated tutorial on this in November.

8. Review of Action Items

  - On Shared Item 3: Pat Thaler and Alia Atlas to have a discussion 
    with the NVO3 chairs about writing the YANG module.

  - On Shared Item 22: Dan Romascanu and Dorothy Stanley to ask Benoit 
    Claise if further work is expected here; if not, then this item can 
    be closed.