Liaison statement
Liaison response on FG Net2030 Deliverables

State Posted
Submitted Date 2020-11-24
From Group IETF
From Contact Alissa Cooper
To Group ITU-T-SG-13
To Contacts tsbsg13@itu.int
CcScott Mansfield
The IETF Chair
The IESG
iab@iab.org
Response Contact The IETF Chair
Purpose In response
Attachments (None)
Liaisons referred by this one LS/o on Deliverables of Focus Group NET2030
Body
The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) thanks Study Group 13 for informing
us that the Focus Group on NET2030 (FG NET2030) has completed its activities
and for sharing the output.

As an assessment of possible future uses of the Internet, FG NET2030 examines
some interesting technologies and some equally interesting desiderata that they
might imply. However, the FG NET2030 deliverables lack the clarity and
specificity necessary to serve as a basis for initiating the standardization of
new technologies. In particular, we do not see the gap analysis provided as
sufficient to constitute a standardization gap analysis as would normally be
expected in the IETF or the ITU-T (see also our liaison response to the ITU-T
TSAG at <https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/1677/>). Many existing, deployed
standards of relevance produced by the IETF and other SDOs appear to have been
omitted from the analysis. One recent contribution to the ad-hoc drafting group
on Questions F and G provides an example of the technical detail necessary in a
gap analysis that evaluates relevant ecosystem work. See
https://www.itu.int/ifa/t/2017/sg13/exchange/Questions%20F%20and%20G/October%202020%20meeting/SG13-gap-analysis-vf.docx.
Without a standardization gap analysis and subsequent coordination with other
SDOs, we remain concerned about how the results of the FG NET2030 and its
deliverables may be used in the creation of new questions in SG13 (and other
parts of the ITU-T).

Were such a standardization gap analysis to be completed, we would welcome it
in the IETF so that it can be integrated into other existing and future
proposals for work on the Internet Protocol stack. As we noted previously in
our liaison response to the ITU-T TSAG, requirements for extensions or
modifications to IETF technologies must be discussed with the IETF before any
are worked on in other SDOs, including the ITU-T. Alternatively, we note that
the Internet Research Task Force (IRTF) has active research groups covering
some of the proposed topics that would welcome submissions, and that some other
items could potentially be developed to form a coherent research agenda
suitable for the IRTF.