================================================================
Drone Remote ID Protocol (drip)
Meeting Agenda
Tue, March 28, 2023
Co-Chairs: Daniel Migault & Mohamed Boucadair

================================================================

• Note well, logistics, and introduction
  Med opened the meeting at 14:31 local time,
  displaying the Note Well.
• Agenda Bashing (5 min)
  Med reviewed the agenda.
• Documents Status (5 min)
  AD Eric V. ensured we had a note taker.
  Med thanked the authors, reviewers, editors & Eric V.
• Report IANA Discussion (Stu, 5 min)
  Number of things outside world since 115
  ANRA building CS-RID with contract with FAA
  ASTM A2X security framework
  Carrying flag ion A2X framework for DRIP
  ANSI gap report for standard documents for UAS
  "uncrewed" not "unmanned" ... yay
  stay with "unmanned" then switch
  field test interop of rid
  DRIP @ ICAO
  MOC back burner till all docs
  DRIP showing off to FAA next week
  US agencies deploying
  need more participants outside US
  registry arch is WG, individual techs are not
  need round is stuff to do useful things
  ICAO wants Observer from IETF in TFP
  ASTM wants ICAO as RID registrar
  Good news (unofficial), ICAO is "days away" for this
  Talks with IANA as a backfill, ready to approach ASTM for this
  IANA unofficially agrees if ASTM asks
  ghost letter by Stu for this purpose
  Jim Reid: Observer from ietf - representing, as a body or what we
  doing in this space? what does it entail?
  TFP for entire aviation, some exerpt in IETF in broad trust issues
  of networking; need a volunteer from IAB
  Eric: nobody speaks other than together, IAB liason. just to be
  clear
  For ICAO they want an SME as non-voting member
  Bob: came up today, PQC for PKI. Discussion in this area. They want
  input. trust in networking. broader of all ietf, not just drip.
  electronic stuff everywhere...weee. broader discussions that ietf
  has worked for many years to give advice for icao and its 30-year
  time frame.
• Implementation Updates (Andrei, 10 min)
  Andrei presented updates on his students'
  open source implementations of DRIP
  plus interesting extensions e.g. blockchain.
  They are actually flying it on Intel NUC w/multi RF links.
  Formal verification of key pieces is underway.
  One aspect of HIP BEX has failed.
  Russ H. suggested IETF (not necessarily DRIP) should fix it.
  Their open source is on Google Play
  but must be downloaded via an explicit link
  as it does not show up in public directories/searches
  (see Andrei's slides for the link).
• draft-ietf-drip-auth (Adam, 10 min)
  Adam summarized status of authentication draft
  (see ASTM - ICAO - IANA discussion above),
  alternative ways forward, recent changes (mostly cleanup),
  and having made it less dependent on hard references
  to the less mature registry documents.
• draft-ietf-drip-registries (Adam, 20 min)
  Adam summarized status of the registry architecture draft.
  He described how we support not only single use Session IDs
  but also static manufacturer assigned serial numbers
  (with 3 methods depending on how the manufacturer plays).
  While how to handle DETs as such in DNS (.ip6.arpa) is clear,
  working group debate on DNS handling of SNs is sought.
  Adam W. & Jim R's suggestion of putting them also in .arpa
  triggered Russ H. to point out that IAB consultation is next
  and Kim D. to point out that naming there is typically based
  not on organizational entities but rather purposes.
  Jim R. explained we are suggesting ICAO play a role in this
  similar to the role played by ITU in the enum .arpa space.
  Bob M. assured us that discussions with high level ICAO
  people were ongoing and friendly.
  Adam explained the logic behind the proposed new RR type,
  which basically was to avoid the costs of extra recursion.
  Peter Koch (in chat) expressed concern/confusion.
  Toerless E. suggested we talk w/DNS experts first and
  if the new RR type is problematic use TXT RRs.
  Jim R. assured us the new process for new RR types is fast
  and that almost all deployed software is well behaved
  when it encounters an unknown RR type.
  Eric V. reminded us to request an early DNS DIR review.
  Bob M. explained the justification for harmonizing DRIP
  endorsements with ICAO's use of X.509.
  Jim R. extended the ITU precedent with the need to delegate
  to national authorities (here, likely CAAs), suggesting
  ICAO knows how to do that.
  Adam explained attempt at cleaning up registry arch doc.
  Stu attempted to connect some dots among DRIP, X.509,
  post quantum, etc.
  Med suggested Adam try to accelerate timeline, esp.
  DNS DIR review; Jim R. said go ahead, send then a draft now.
  Med suggest Adam highlight the proposal for a new RR type,
  then send it, then we have some interim meetings.
• Misc. (5 min)
  Med solicited any final words then closed the meeting.