Drone Remote ID Protocol (drip)  
Tue, November 07, 2023  
Co-Chairs: Daniel Migault & Mohamed Boucadair  
Minutes: Stu, Adam

# Agenda Bashing & Documents Status (5 min)   {#agenda-bashing--documents-status-------------------------5-min}

Daniel M. welcomed all participants.

# Implementations Updates   {#implementations-updates}

## DRIP Implementations Updates (Andrei) (10 min)   {#drip-implementations-updates-andrei--------------------10-min}

Andrei G. reported his students updating their code to the published
RFCs.  
They are also experimenting with DNS as per the registries draft.  
OpenHIP BEET is still being debugged.

## New DRIP Implementation (Govind) (10 min)   {#new-drip-implementation-govind-------------------------10-min}

Govind S. reported on TII's DRIP compatible UTM Surveillance SDSP.  
Extended range testing is in progress.

EV(chat): the use of word 'surveillance' is a poor choice

# Protocol Specification & Deployment   {#protocol-specification--deployment}

## Registries: Status, Issues, Next Steps (Adam) (15 min)   {#registries-status-issues-next-steps-adam------------15-min}

*   Outcome of the discussions with IANA about delegation  
    Adam W. reported progress w/essential .ip6.arpa reverse lookup &
    proposed deferral of optional manufacturer assigned UAS serial
    number forward lookup.
*   DRIP RR request  
    Adam W. reported proposed minimization of new DET RR type by using
    existing RR types for much of the needed info.
*   Other related business  
    Adam W. reported multiple open issues being worked.

Jim R. provided more detail on IANA/IETF/ICAO interactions re: DNS.  
He thanked IANA esp. Kim D. for their advice & support.  
Kim D. confirmed IANA's agreement to assist.  
Automation can be deferred until volume necessitates it.

## Operationalizing DRIP: the DKI Approach (Bob) (15 min)   {#operationalizing-drip-the-dki-approach-bob------------15-min}

*   DKI Objectives  
    Bob M. justified why a DKI & specs for it are needed to get DRIP
    deployed.
*   How this can be used/useful and to whom?  
    Bob M. explained how potential vulnerabilities motivate an extra
    layer.
*   Is this in the charter?  
    Bob M. asserted the charter scope is broad enough to cover this.  
    In chat, Stu C. concurred.
*   Why we need to adopt?  
    Bob M. said experimenters (inc. CAAs) need this guidance.
*   This is a support document: Adopt but not publish as RFC \[1\]  
    AD Eric V. reminded us of the need to follow established IETF
    processes.

Bob M. reported on the increasing internatioinal gov't, industry &
external SDO interest in making UAS RID information trustworthy &
immediately actionable, also in protecting operator reputation, thus
DRIP.

# Future of the WG (5 min)   {#future-of-the-wg------------------------------------------5-min}

AD Eric V. reminded us that IESG looks for critical mass of active WG
participants to sustain a WG.

\[1\]
https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/support-documents-2016-11-13/