Chairs:
John Scudder <jgs@juniper.net>
Jim Guichard <james.n.guichard@futurewei.com>
Gunter Van de Velde <gunter.van_de_velde@nokia.com>
Note taker: Ketan
Date: March 19, 2025
Time: 15:30 - 16:30 (UTC+7) Wednesday Session III
Room: Chitlada 4
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/122/session/lsvr
https://notes.ietf.org/notes-ietf-122-rtgarea
https://zulip.ietf.org/#narrow/stream/rtgarea
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LyLr6YZ_NLY
https://www.meetecho.com/ietf122/recordings#RTGAREA
Yingzhen: Thanks John. Prepared poster with lots of RTG area
participants signed handed over to John.
John: Thanks. Genuine honor to serve and will continue to contribute to
the area.
< John gives something to Ketan; Ketan says that shall not be revealed >
Jim: If you are on the directorate, go to the wiki and update your
skills.
John: False modesty is not helpful
Adrian: Other areas don't ask for other RTG reviews. To ADs, will more
of those docs from other areas will benefit from RTG reviews? What can
we do better?
John: ADs discussed and concluded that lot of them don't need RTG
reviews (e.g., ART). Some could benefit and don't get it. ADs have AIs
to see how to improve this.
Gunter: Thanks from ADs to the helpful work from the reviewers and the
secretaries for the assignment and tracking. We will try to understand
how to improve and optimize. Would like to get feedback from the
reviewers on improvements.
Tony Li: Plug in for the part about spell and grammar check. Grammarly,
Microsoft Word, etc. For those that are not native English speakers this
would help; also get help from colleagues (document writers) at your
company.
Ketan: Thanks for naming some of those tools.
Jim: I would be stronger on that. One of things noticed as ADs is that
collaboration between WGs is not going well - have seen this recently.
The earlier this is done, less work at the end of the process.
< no comments >
Lars Eggert: On the tcpdump point. Most stacks let you set SSL keylock
so you can get the keys, so don't need a proxy. For non routing people,
can you elaborate on the NSR stuff.
Jeff: Peering sessions stay up for months. This is challenging to leave
keys on the box. Scary. On NSR, need to run full loop of TCP on both
active and standby. For Quic, you need to look inside the box and be
able to look inside the TLS.
Lars: Comment - you might want to look at HTTP. May not be suitable ...
Jeff: Quic is more like HTTP lite. This is to bring attention to RTG
area as work has started in several WGs. Routing wants to use the
toolbox that gives security and not build security tools. Not much time
spent on transport security. < see recording for details >
Jeff: How does BGP use streams?
Tom Hill: Extremely important. British law about "you should use
encryption" - is challenging. Certificate management in routers is poor
- across vendors. Improve certificate management w/o waiting for Quic
Jeff: Let's do this right (templates?). < discussion about improving
certificate management and security on the routers >
Tom Hill: And then TCP AO comes into the conversation ..
Mike Bishop: You wish quic could have given PDU boundaries. One option
is stream per message. Things built for TCP and quic
diverging. Work in progress. Having a mapping layer for TCP that has
streams based. < more discussions > Would love to know and get inputs.
Jeff: Space is big. 2^32 seems ok. Using stream per PDU won't work. Also
concerned that the management of each individual stream < video for
details>
Jim: Interrupt - sorry to interrupt. Needs more discussions.
John: A side meeting or a bar bof?
Jim: Thank you and have a good rest of the week!
< run out of time >