MARCH 18, 2026
ROMAN DANYLIW: Okay, if you're standing in the back wandering, please come find a seat. We're about to get started.
Good afternoon, everyone. And if you're joining us from remotely from some place around the world, welcome to the Plenary session of IETF 125 here in Shenzhen. It's my pleasure to facilitate us this evening. My name is Roman Danyliw, and I'm Chair of the IETF.
As a reminder, you've already agreed to a number of processes and kind of policies here at the IETF. This Note Well just highlights some but not all of them to include our guidelines for conduct, our intellectual property rights. It describes and has references to our standards process and our working group guidelines, in addition to things like our IETF privacy statement. If you have any questions about this, please do talk to a working group chair or an area director. Next slide, please. Cindy, could I have the next slide, please?
CINDY MORGAN: We are seeing the agenda slide right now.
ROMAN DANYLIW: Okay, I am seeing it as well. There's latency, at times, on the Internet.
So we have a very full agenda, as we normally do. First, we're going to open with a greeting from our meeting host. Then, we are going to have a series of reports from the leadership bodies and committees. Then we're going to hear from the IETF Trust, and after that, it's going to be the IETF Administration LLC Report. And we always have time at the end, forming the bulk of the meeting, open mic for the community to ask questions of the different leadership bodies. This year at this time we're meeting, the order is going to be the IAB, the IESG, and then the IETF LLC.
So before we get started, I wanted to give a huge thank you to not only those that work so tirelessly before the meeting kind of starts and here on-site like the Secretariat, the Meetecho team, the NOC team, and all the LLC staff, but also acknowledge all the hard work of the people that help us be productive even once we arrive on-site. A big thank you to the RFC production and the IANA that push the documents as far forward in the pipeline and do the codepoint assignments as quickly as possible. So we arrive at the meeting, prepared to have discussions for the latest state. I wanted to publicly thank all of those individuals for their contribution. Please join me in welcoming them.
(Applause)
Well, thank you for that. So next, I would invite to the stage Mr. Chen Kai, the Deputy Director of the Bureau of Information and Telecommunication in the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology for a welcome and a greeting for us here.
(Applause)
CHEN KAI: (Translated to English)
Today, it is my great honor to be here in Shenzhen with global Internet
experts for the IETF 125 meeting. First, I extend a sincere welcome to all
guests and friends from afar. I warmly congratulate the successful hosting
of this meeting and express my heartfelt thanks to our international friends
who have long cared for and supported the development of China's
Internet.
As a highly influential international organization in this field, the IETF has
made irreplaceable contributions to core Internet protocols, architecture,
and technical standards. You have laid a solid technical foundation for a
prosperous global Internet, and we highly appreciate your work.
China upholds the spirit of openness, inclusiveness, and win-win
cooperation. We are committed to open technological cooperation. We
support Internet tech communities in deepening international exchanges,
actively participating in global standard-setting, and promoting
infrastructure connectivity.
We aim to build a peaceful, secure, open, cooperative, and orderly
cyberspace, contributing to a global Internet that is sustainable and
innovative.
Today, new technologies are constantly emerging. The deep integration
of AI and the Internet brings both development opportunities and new
challenges. We look forward to using this meeting as an opportunity to
deeply discuss emerging technologies and innovative ideas. We also
hope this event will drive practical cooperation among all parties,
advancing the high-quality development of the global Internet industry.
Let us join hands and break new ground. Together, we can build a
community with a shared future in cyberspace, making technology a true
force for good across the globe.
Finally, I wish you all a productive and pleasant stay in Shenzhen!
(Applause)
ROMAN DANYLIW: Mr. Chen, thank you for your very kind words and your welcome, as we have returned back to China after almost a decade since we last met here.
I now welcome to the stage Ms. Zhang Xiao, the Deputy Director of CNNIC. We wanted to extend our sincere thank you for all of your leadership and work in making this meeting happen for us here. We have a small token of appreciation presented to us by our board.
(Applause)
ROMAN DANYLIW: Thank you so much for making this meeting happen for us.
So now we're going to move into the portion of the agenda where the different leadership bodies are going to provide their reports. I am first from the perspective of the IESG. I tried to slim down the content we had here. I have a much more robust report. Please take it if you're interested in more details for what I'm going to talk about here or additional facts and figures and summaries since we last met. Please do click on that link that says "Full report", and you'll see there's additional information. It's been updated a few times since it was initially issued.
We have had a very robust meeting here in Shenzhen. And I wanted to put this all in context. We are assembling as the largest group on-site that we've gathered in at least two year, maybe a little more, in the historical figures. This is the largest meeting we've had in Asia and the largest meeting we've had anywhere based on the registration count. So phenomenal to see the community come together. You'll see that the distribution of remote and on-site is within the bands that we've had in historical meetings. I think the one piece of excitement of the early stats that I saw coming in is that if you look around, you know, sitting to your left there are two people and one other person to your right, one of those people is new to the IETF, unless you are. So one quarter -- almost one quarter of participants here at the IETF have never been to a meeting before, and we're delighted to have them here as part of the community. If you are one of those newcomers to the IETF, all I can say is welcome. We're thrilled that you're here helping us shape the future of the Internet. Please join a mailing list. Please do continue to engage in the working groups after this face-to-face time concludes, and we hope we'll maybe we'll also see new Vienna or perhaps in San Francisco, the future venues we have for our meetings.
Unsurprisingly, we have participation from around the world, and you can see some of the more detailed statistics here. And also equally unsurprising, we have a very, very robust participation from China given that we are here.
Since we last got together, the IESG has issued no statements, and the majority of what we focused on in our announcements was related to an appointment to the IETF Trust and to the IPMC. So first, we want to publicly say very much thank you to Sean Turner who has been selected. And we really appreciate your willingness to serve, Sean.
We also did an announcement for calling for volunteers for BCP 245 moderators, and I'm going to talk about that a little bit later.
We continue to process appeals. We received two appeals since we last got together, and we processed both of them. You can see from the historical -- from the chart on historical appeal volumes that 2025 was record with a look back of almost kind of 10 years.
I just wanted to take this opportunity, since all the other areas have their summaries of what's happening, to talk about what's happening in the General Area, primarily because everything that happens in GEN affects each and every one of you in the room because the processes defined in GEN impact every working group and everything published in the IETF stream.
To showcase, if you are interested in anything related to how IANA and codepoints are specified here in IETF documents, please join us the IANABIS Working Group. If you aspire to tailor, to change, or to evolve how we run the standards process, how working grouping operate, please join us this the PROCON Working Group, the Process Document Consolidations. If you have interest in contributing around how intellectual property is managed here at the IETF, please join the IPR-W Working Group. Actively being discussed now is setting requirements for the transition to the IPMC and updates to our intellectual property framework in RFC 5378.
To return back to that one announcement I said I would talk more about, the MODPOD Working Group worked very hard and delivered their primary artifact which was RFC 9945 which defines a new approach to community moderation in the IETF. This was recently approved. To realize that and to implement that process, that first step is the IESG needs to appoint at least five moderators whose first task is going to be write those procedures, and then, of course, execute them as moderators. We are calling to the community to seek moderators, so if you are interested in that role, please let the IESG know. Also, if you think someone would be excellent in that role, even if it is not you, we welcome that feedback as well, and we'll consider it and we'll reach out to them.
And then the last highlight is that the IAB, who is in charge of liaison relationships working with the other standards kind of organizations, is revising those procedures which are codified in RFC 4052 and 4053. And they're being actively discussed on the architecture --
(Presenter dropped from Meetecho)
CINDY MORGAN: It appears we've lost Roman, if we could please stand by for one minute.
ROMAN DANYLIW: All right. I think I'm back.
CINDY MORGAN: You are back.
ROMAN DANYLIW: Excellent. So as I was saying, the liaison procedures are being revised, and so, if outreach and interconnect with other standards organization is your passion, this will also be another time to engage. So hop on to architecture-discuss[@ietf.org] to get into the early discussion, and we're going to be bringing that into the IETF.
So I wanted to almost end this thing with two thank yous. So the first, I wanted to acknowledge that the vast majority of your ADs are sponsored by someone. They pay for their time and pay for their travel. And this enables them to be here to serve the community and also to do that each and every week. And here is an acknowledgment of those entities that make that possible for the ADs.
(Applause)
And then I wanted to end with another thank you, which is to Stephanie McCammon. So for those of you who are not aware, Stephanie currently supports us as the Director of Meeting Operations and Sponsorships. But she will be, unfortunately, exiting from that role. For the last 20 -- almost 20 years, Stephanie has worked to give us this productive space that we are in now in so many places around the world, about 54 of those. And that space that she's given us has allowed the velocity of our standardization to continue to reach and penetrate and make -- to penetrate all the technologies around the world in an interoperable fashion and to really make the Internet operate. No detail has been too small for her, whether it's making sure we are in this venue and these venues can service the kind of conversations that we need to have, but she's also worked tirelessly to help us pay for our ability to convene in all these places. That's been the two parts about the meeting ops and in the sponsorship. And as you can see there, I don't know how many times around the world you've now flown on our behalf, Stephanie, and honestly, the years you've been away from your family and friends to allow us to be productive here with, you know, really all we can say is thank you, thank you so much. And you know, best of luck with your next kind of engagements and the next part of your career and your opportunities. So thank you so much on behalf of the community.
(Applause)
I now turn it over to Dhruv Dhody who, congratulations, is the new Chair of the IAB.
(Applause)
DHRUV DHODY: Hello, everyone. I'm Dhruv Dhody. I'm the incoming IAB Chair. So we have the full IAB Report, which you can find on our website as well as on the IETF 125 proceedings. But this, we will keep it short and sweet.
We did one workshop recently in December, which was on IP address geolocation. The initial report is out. And we had a good discussion in the IAB Open as well, so check it out. Those videos, as well as the videos of the whole workshop, everything is available on our IAB page and Datatracker.
We did a bunch of outreach activities. We were at the ICANN 85 last week in Mumbai, which went quite well. Warren and I were there. Warren was also at the APRICOT and APNIC meeting in Jakarta where we talked about what's happening at this IETF meeting and inviting more participants from the operator from the region to come to Shenzhen. As well as, Roman was at WSIS+20 High-Level U.N. meeting where the outcome document was adopted by consensus, which is something we in the community and IAB has been participating at.
Appeals, we responded to three appeals since the last IETF meeting.
And with that, let me pass it on to Dirk who will talk about IRTF.
(Applause)
DIRK KUTSCHER: Thank you, Dhruv. Hello, I'm Dirk Kutscher, the IRTF Chair. Before I give you my updates, I would like to say a few words. So as IRTF Chair, I see it as my job to bring in new communities, especially the younger generation, the next generation in our community. So we're doing quite a bit of outreach, training, and so on. So at this meeting, I have received really great support. I just realized in the past days. So there has been a young program in China supported by some of the sponsors here that brought 60 students from like 30 different universities to this meeting. There has been a research fellowship program in Malaysia that brought students, not only to this meeting, but also previously. And there's a program in Brazil that brought 18 people to this meeting. So the Brazilian friends, they had the longest journey, by far. So they were on the road or on the plane for two or three days. And then, please stand up so we can see you all. Welcome to the IETF.
(Applause)
So they come all this way to engage with us, to meet the experts, to meet the leadership, and I really hope this will be worthwhile.
Okay, so in the IRTF, we have 16 research groups at the moment, and 11 of them are meeting this week. So we still have meetings by Crypto Forum, RASPRG, and Network Management RG coming up in the next two days. Please check that out.
Then we have the Applied Networking Research Workshop and the Applied Networking Research Prize. These two instruments are intended to raise the profile of our committee and the research committee, support high-quality research, and also get new ideas, new people in. And ANRW and the workshop is kindly supported by ACM SIGCOMM and Akamai. And we do this yearly at our summer IETF meeting, so next one will be in Vienna, IETF 126. The workshop chairs are Thomas Schmidt and Suresh Krishnan. Thanks very much for doing the work.The call for papers is open. Please submit your papers until April17th.
The Applied Networking Research Prize recognizes the best results in applied networking from like last year. So what we do is nominate, like, top contributions in the field of applied networking, and there's a selection committee that picks the best ones. And this is supported by ISOC, Comcast, and NBCUniversal. And quite often, we get, you know, really, really top papers on topics that are really relevant and also quite current at the moment in the IETF. And so, just today in IETF Open, we had two ANRP winners. So we had Tianyi Gao, and he was awarded for his work on transport-level encryption for datacenter networks. And Xiangjie Huang for his work on sending burstness control for high-quality, real-time communication. Congratulations.
(Applause)
So this week, we actually had two IRTF Open meetings. So one just before, and on Tuesday, we had one that was dedicated on discussing Internet working research changes for AI. So we know many discussions on the broader topic, so we wanted to figure out what could be a productive role for the IRTF in this field. So beyond datacenters, beyond the immediate engineering challenges. There's a lot of work in academia and conference and so on, we want to figure out, okay, how can we make this useful for our larger community. So we invited two really great presentations on different aspects and had good discussion on potential topics. So what we identified so far was testbeds and data sets for groups of experiments, like the broader system and protocol design for inference platforms. There are new architectures coming out. And you know, new abstractions for like collective communications and so on. But also, more principled approaches towards agent communication. You know, also hot topic in side meetings and also the BoF this morning. So the idea here is to look a bit more into the foundations of naming, identity, trust mitigation, and also group communication.
And yeah, finally, we also have a travel grant program, so that's intended to bring early career researchers and PhD students to our community from under-represented groups. This is kindly supported by Akamai, Comcast, Google, and Netflix. Yeah, so this time we had a robust participation from Asia. Really good gender balance. So we are already preparing the next program for Vienna. So the deadline for applications is end of next week. If you're interested or if you know somebody who might be, please let them know. Thank you very much.
(Applause)
BENNO OVEREINDER: Thank you. So thank you. So this is my last report as the IETF NomCom Chair for this cycle. These were the people of the NomCom '25-26 cycle. Voting members, some of them are here. So please thank them if you see them in the hallway. I see one of my NomCom members in the Tokyo remote. So people in Tokyo, they came also. And here are the non-voting members, the liaisons and my advisor. Good. But it's not about us; it's about selection for this year.
So we're very happy with the current selection. So we had one selection for the LLC Board, one for the Trust, IETF Trust and IPMC, six selections, selected candidates for the IAB, a two-term period, and for this year, the IETF Chair and for the six areas candidates for a period of two years. So I would like to thank all the people that are willing to serve for the next term, willing to serve the IETF. Thank you very much.
(Applause)
Good. One thing I want to mention is diversity, of course. That's something that's important to us, to our community, and also to the NomCom. We got a training this year, like last year, about unconscious bias, et cetera. So that's important. I think that's something that the NomCom was very aware of also during the whole process of reviewing, interviews, and the deliberations. Some highlights here are, well, not highlight per se, there's no gender diversity improvement this cycle. So we are aware of. We are considerate of that. But of course, we try to improve every year. But this is the observation here. We improved on regional diversity. That's a good thing. So different voices, different perspectives are good for our community. So this is a positive improvement here, and we try to improve the process and awareness of everything.
I call it here the leadership pipeline, young people, new leadership, next-generation leadership. And we also hear that from the community. In every review, all the reviews we receive, thank you IETF community for your reviews, for your feedback on the nominees. It's important and stressed to think about new generation, about the next generation leadership. So with the incumbents interviewing the nominees that are already in leadership positions, the NomCom members always ask about thinking about your succession. And luckily, most of them think about it and are actually already mentoring candidates for -- or nominees actually for the next NomCom cycle. And of course, it's up to the NomCom in one, two, three, four years to select the nominee, but it's good that we have nominees to select from. So thanks. Yeah, as I already said, we are aware of it. We are doing our best. We are in a good place, but we can always do better, so it's a constant process.
Another thing is, well, lessons learned. The first bullet point is the same as last year and as the year before. It's a good document, our RFC 8713, but there are impractical situations. It doesn't say anything about new situations or things we haven't thought of. So, well, there's one thing mentioned, the chair with the NomCom can always come up with a rule with some voting and decide how to process and accept it for a not-expected situation. So it works. In the same bullet point here, the NomCom process relies on the chair and on the oral tradition. And that's worked also, but that's now a new point I want to work on. At least some basic documentation how the things work. Some steps, basic steps, at least, how to proceed through the NomCom as a chair. And that could also help with the help of, well, kind of delegating tasks to the Secretariat because more and more tasks are now taken care of by the secretary, so it's good to have some documentations. And mostly the practical stuff. That's, yeah, and also, for myself, at least, during the deliberation, I spent a little bit too much time on the voting. It just seems to be simple process, but I was counting the yes and noes were simple, but yes maybe no, that becomes more difficult. And then yes -- all kind of rankings. So I think for the next chair, it's good to have a little bit automated so it can focus on the process and on the discussions and not so much on counting and making mistakes or being corrected from mistakes.
So finally, yeah, some words of thanks. I want to thank you all for the opportunity to be the NomCom Chair for this cycle. It's very -- well, I learned a lot and it was super interesting, and it was very rewarding. Also, the IETF community was very supportive. In the beginning, I made some mistakes. And as you are, you directly sent me an email that I made a mistake. But it was always supportive. People helped me out. So thank you. Also, the NomCom voting members were very, very dedicated. So it was a great team. I mentioned it already during the November IETF meeting. And again, the chairs' advisors and the liaisons helped me with the process and advice. It's almost -- I get an award for the Oscar, Academy Awards with all the thank yous. Good.
Before I leave the stage, I want to call out volunteer for the next cycle of the NomCom. It's a lot of work, yes, it is. But it's also, you learn -- a lot of things about IETF process, about the people in the IETF, and its processes. Thank you.
(Applause)
GLENN DEEN: Benno is a little bit taller than I am. And I was on the NomCom, and I will echo, please do the NomCom. It's a really great experience. You learn so much, and you meet some great people. Anyways, I'm Glenn Deen, and I'm the outgoing Chair of the IPMC Corporation and the IETF Trust. This is our report to IETF 125.
So NomComs do what they do, and the IESG does what it does, and they both appoint people to the IETF Trust and the IPMC Board. In this cycle, we say good-bye to Kristin Berdan who has served us as an IESG appointee. Kristin was really helpful. She's a lawyer by training. Very helpful in the restructuring work we've been undergoing doing the IETF IPMC creation and setup. So thank you very much for Kristin for your service to the IETF Trust and the IPMC.
(Applause)
Then there's this guy [Glen Deen]. He's been around for quite a while, and one trivia bit about the IETF Trust and the IPMC roles is they are not term-limited. Many of our roles at the IETF are term-limited. We like people to stick around the IETF Trust to build up institutional knowledge and be able to really help the organization. That doesn't mean you stick around forever, and this guy is leaving after sticking around for a little while. So I've had a lot of fun. I've learned a lot of stuff. I will say if you're ever looking to learn about intellectual property and the IETF, this is a great role to apply for in the future. When I started it back in the day, I was terrified. I was walking in the shadow of giants. And I learned so much about being part of it. I really highly recommend that you consider it this coming year with the NomCom is appointing another person. So thank you for letting me be that role. I've really enjoyed it.
(Applause)
So we have a new set of directors for the IETF IPMC. A couple of them are carrying over, but we have two new ones. Lars Eggert is coming in as is Sean Turner. And we've gone through a cycle of selecting the next president and the other officers, so I would like to announce Wendy Seltzer is taking on the role as IPMC President.
(Applause)
Sean Turner, who I think is in the Tokyo remote, is taking on the role of IPMC Treasurer, which Wendy vacated, and Lars will be taking on the IPMC Secretary.
Likewise, the IETF Trust is in the final throes, but we still needed some people around to close up shop. So the decision was made that the person that will be the Trust Chair for the very final role of the Trust will be Wendy. So thank you, Wendy, for taking on both roles.
(Applause)
All right, so that's the in and the out stuff. Let's talk about what we've been doing. So we like to give a report, and usually these numbers are zero because Trust is set up to be very boring, and when everything is perfect, it is very boring. But since we last met in Montreal, we've had two licensing requests that are above and beyond the normal licensing requests we get. And we issued one new license. It was to the IEEE to use ASN.1 module from RFC 9881. So we got one.
The other good news is we have zero legal actions, which is the number you always want to see at the bottom there. It means we didn't sue anybody, and we didn't get sued by anybody, which is really good if you deal in intellectual property assets.
So here is the other big update. We've been working on this restructuring from a Virginia Trust into a Delaware Corporation. And those of you that have been around the IETF a little while, I've given a lot of reports on this. So we've had some progress. The bylaws were updated between when we met in Montreal and now. We had some modifications we extended in there to recognize the CCG. This is part of the community agreement that we took on when we took on the IANA assets back in 2016. And we updated the IPMC bylaws to recognize the CCG's role with relation to the IANA assets. So it's formerly connected to that group with the bylaws of the IPMC operates under. And that was for a 60-day review, and all of you gave us comments. We took them into account, and then in December, we actually voted to adopt them. And those are on the IPMC website at that URL.
This one's big. We've been working for a couple years now to get this transition done. Last Monday, a week ago Monday, I signed the agreement that formally transferred all of the IETF intellectual property assets for the IETF Trust into the IPMC Corporation. The IPMC is now doing the work of managing the IP, except for patents, because the IPMC does not do patents, for IETF. And that is a major milestone. So hold your applause on that because there's something coming up for that one. But I think this is a major movement. It's something we've been working to for years, and I'm super happy that we got there. But we're not fully done yet.
The IANA IP, which is trademarks and domains related to the IANA function, is still in process because we are needing some signatures. There's agreements that establish the role of the IETF Trust with relation to the IANA, and there's a set of signatures out there for the agreements on those things, transfer the agreements from the IETF Trust to the IPMC. So I've done my signature before I no longer was the chair. I know that Jay has done the signature on behalf of the IAB IETF. If you're one of the people we're waiting for signatures on, sign the document so we can get that thing done.
And some final things. Roman mentioned that there's a draft out there to update the IETF's documentation because if you look at the IETF documentation, it's got the word IETF Trust all over the place. We have a draft out there to update the documentation to recognize the IETF IPMC as the successor to that, so that draft's out there and is active. That's the URL for the IPR WG email list.
And finally, the Trust Legal Provisions, which are now becoming the Technical Legal Provisions so we can keep that same acronym, are being updated to essentially update the text in there to say that the IPMC is now the party holding the assets of the IETF. One of the changes -- there's no legal changes to that document. Same terms. If your lawyers have approved and like it, they're remaining consistent. Two changes though. Since that draft or that document's first written, version five, the editorial stream got created so we are officially recognizing it in the next version. That's sort of -- the other thing is the independent stream, there's some updates we've been requested by the independent stream editor to make around derivative works, so there will be a second document published specially for the independent stream. And oh, and they'll be published for comment for a 30-day period for you to get your voice in.
So here's the thing I wanted to recognize. We've done the outgoing for myself and for Kristin. But I think we should also do an outgoing for the IETF Trust. It served this community since 2005 when it was created. It's officially ending operations this year. It's got literally at this point I think about $1,200 in the bank, and it has a handful of DNS domains that are part of the IANA work. That's it. So once those agreements are signed, those things will transferred over, and does final tax filings, it's done. So I really did want to have a hand for the IETF Trust because it has made this what is the IETF functional, and it's done it for 21 years. That's quite a service to this community. And I wanted to recognize all the people during that 21 years who have served as IETF trustees. This is an unpaid job. They're all volunteers. They've done a tremendous amount of work for this community. And a lot of people don't even know what they do, which is good because that means they didn't get sued, because no drama, no excitement. But anyways, for the IETF Trust and for all the people who volunteered, can I please have a round of applause?
(Applause)
And that is how to contact the IPMC and get more stuff.
GEORGE MICHAELSON: Don't leave the stage. So Glenn, thank you for your many years of service and allow me to present you with this plaque.
(Applause)
JAY DALEY: Hello and welcome. My name is Jay Daley. I'm the IETF Executive Director. Nice to see so many people in the room. So this is the Administrative Report for the IETF. And I'll start by thanking our IETF 125 host, CNNIC and our co-host, Tsinghua University, the Internet Society of China, CCSA, and the Computer Network Information Center of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Thank you very much.
(Applause)
I also want to thank very much Huawei, our Special Contributor and Social Event sponsor. Those of you who came last night to the social event, I'm sure will remember that. That is the best social event we have had. That was spectacular. Thank you.
(Applause)
And then thank you very much to the welcome reception sponsors ZTE, to our local sponsor APNIC, and our local supporters Coremail. Thank you.
(Applause)
I also want to thank our IETF 125 Gold Sponsors. For Diversity and Inclusion, thank you to Akamai and Huawei.
(Applause)
And thank you to all of our Bronze Sponsors for IETF 125. We have Comcast and ICANN for Diversity and Inclusion. We have ZTE for Sustainability. ICANN and CNNIC for Running Code. And DENIC and Nominet for the Open Internet. Thank you all very much.
(Applause)
And then finally, thank you to our Equipment Services and Connectivity Sponsors, without whom we would have to spend considerably more money running these meetings and running the IETF with them we do currently. Thank you very much to all of you.
(Applause)
I should particularly like to note China Mobile and China Unicom who have helped very much with this conference. We have staff on-site helping us out with our Wi-Fi, which is really going above and beyond. Thank you very much.
(Applause)
Every meeting it seems our logos get more and more desirable. So once again, I'm happy to tell you can get our swag from the online store. And we are taking very seriously the suggestions that we should start selling more our swag here at the meeting, particularly for those people who go running, such as our current IETF Chair.
So I want to give a special shout out to the many generous volunteers that help us out. In building the IETF tools and in running the IETF NOC, we rely on multiple people who give their time freely to help that work. So thank you very much to all of those people.
(Applause)
And Roman's already mentioned that we have many staff in the background working on this, but I think it's useful for us to give their names and show all of them here. So we have the Secretariat, Meetecho, and the NOC. Thank you all very much for your work.
(Applause)
Here at IETF 125, we only have a subset of the IETF staff. So I'm on-site, clearly. I also have Greg with me and three of our senior developers. They are staffing the Tools Help Desk, so please reach out to them at any point if you would like to see them. We also have the RPC staff at IETF 125. Alanna, Alice, and Sandy are here. They are also staffing a desk, so if you have any questions about RPCs, sorry, RFCs or the editing process, please go and speak to them. And we have the full Secretariat on-site as well. So this is a simple diagram of the current structure there. So look out for the green tops they're wearing. If you need any support, see them. If you need to speak about anything in particular, please speak to them as well.
So finally, on the thanks, thank you to our Global Hosts. Our Global Hosts are the ones that make the multi-year commitment to the IETF and enable us to have the long-term stability for our funding that we really need. Thank you very much.
(Applause)
So IETF 126 Vienna, registrations are open. This will be in July. We are expecting many to come. We are just about to sign with the host for the meeting, so that's good news for us. And I hope very much to see as many as possible of you there.
So looking forward to our meetings, we have Vienna coming up, and then after that, we have IETF 127 in San Francisco. And since our last meeting, you will have seen that we have announced Verisign as the host of that meeting. IETF 128 in Asia, we are still in the negotiations with. It generally takes us quite some time to negotiate Asian venues. They are more complicated. We often have to use convention centres, and us being a U.S. company means we need to visit a number of times to build up the trust and the relationship. So that's going ahead. We certainly aim to announce that by Vienna, if possible. IETF 129 Europe, that was due to be signed, and then the venue just asked for a change to the contract the other day. So we are just trying to work through that, and then we will be able to announce that. Hopefully, quite shortly. IETF 130 has now been announced. That's the Hyatt Regency Vancouver that we've been back to a number of times. And we are, of course, looking for a meeting host for that. IETF 131 in Asia, we have held some site visits to a relatively large country there to look at potential venues. And we are hoping or we're in the negotiations now about that. So that's moving forward. IETF 132 Europe is a little bit in the back burner while we sort the others out. And IETF 133 is not on here, North America, but we are currently exploring an exploratory meeting in South America for that. So that's where we currently are with our meetings booking. We're a little bit behind, but we have so many of them quite close that we'll catch up quickly, and then we'll be a bit ahead, I think, by the end of this year on meeting bookings. So that's it from me. Thank you very much. Handing over to Mirjam.
MIRJAM KÜHNE: Thanks, Jay.
(Applause)
I hope you can hear me and see me. My name is Mirjam Kühne, I'm the Board of the LLC -- I'm the Chair of the LLC Board, that's more correct. And I would like to thank you, actually, for selecting me for another term starting at this meeting.
Yes, this is the full board. You can see here, Gonzalo and George are there with you in-person. Roman is always online. I'm online here. And Shauna cannot join us for this meeting. But we're all watching.
Yeah, this is the traditional financial overview of the end-of-year balance. And I'm not going through all the numbers. You can do that in your own time. I mean, for transparency reasons, obviously, we put them on the slides, so they will be published. You see some notes there. So if you go to the next slide, you'll see some explanations and more details can be found in the financial statements that we publish every month and then also attend of the year. Overall, one thing to note here is there are some higher numbers as budgeted, so the positive variance is there are mostly compromised of additional endowment contributions, which always welcome, ISOC matching funds, also the contributions from ISOC, and some unrealized gains from investments that we have in there. So that's good news.
Just some items that the Board is currently working on. We are still working on the Secretariat contract re-tendering that's ongoing. We've published the 2026 budget after consultation of the community consultations, so that's out on the website. As you've seen, we've piloted this new feature with remote rooms with IETF meetings. And I've seen the remote room join a couple of sessions. It seems to work really well. Thanks mostly to LLC staff and Greg Wood I think took the lead for making this possible. And we're going to evaluate the experiences with this after the meeting and see how we can move forward with that.
And we also having our annual retreat in April. The board retreat, we're preparing for that to look at future planning, strategy, risk register, and other plans that we will be doing on an annual basis.
One thing that's not on here but it's certainly also on our mind is meeting network and meeting locations, and really I want to stress that I really appreciate the feedback provided so far on the various lists, specifically also on meeting networks. And we're looking forward to getting more guidance from you on that as well. I know there's a draft currently out on the security requirements for the IETF network that will be discussed tomorrow, I believe, in GENDISPATCH. And we'll see where that goes after that. So please watch that space and contribute to that work.
You can also contribute to our work, well, by participating in our board meetings. We have a monthly board meeting. Here are the dates, and they're always on the website. And Michelle, the secretary, she sends out announcements for the board meetings. So they're open to observers, partially. Part of the meetings, we also have some closed sessions with staff and Jay, but yes, please join us for these board meetings if you have any questions or contributions to our work.
I think that's about it. Yes, you can find a lot more information on the websites from financial statements to the Board meeting minutes and announcements and also here are a number of mailing, mail addresses and lists that you can reach us at and discuss our generic administrative mailing list where most of these topics are being discussed. So I think that's it for now. Thank you for listening.
DHRUV DHODY: Well, let's start with thanking the outgoing IAB members. It almost feels like a milestone. We are losing three members who have been there for a while. Cullen, as we know him as Fluffy. And I think now I can claim the fluffiest hair now that he's not on the IAB anymore, maybe. But seriously, you have the -- it's so good to talk to you. When we talk technical discussion, you go directly to the heart of the matter, and that much clarity of thought, it has been amazing having discussions with you.
Mirja, you have served a decade on the leadership at the IAB and IESG. Every term with so much dedication, so much hard work. It has been amazing. The things that you have done as the IAB Chair have such a lasting impact. You have opened the IAB with IAB Open, the way we do liaisons, the way we -- even our website revamp. So everything that think of IAB as current has been done under your leadership, and it has been amazing.
Tommy, on the big screen, always calm, collected, always clear in thought. As the IAB Chair, we went through a transition. We had a big geographic and time zone dispersion. And we had to figure out a new way to work. You managed it so well, and there was so much to learn from you on how to do that.
As an IAB, we went through a new activities with respect to more active participation at Internet governance, and you helped us. You made sure that each of us at the IAB felt supported in all the activities that we do. So thank you.
And finally, Qin. Qin has been our anchor when it comes to everything network management, operations, and YANG. And this is -- and Qin showed us the diverse participation matters, having a viewpoint from looking from different areas, from different geography, bringing a different viewpoint to this IAB is fundamental. And Qin, you have shown that in our last two terms.
So with that, I will ask everyone to give a round of applause to all four outgoing members.
(Applause)
For the two outgoing members who are here, we can use a photo opportunity. Mirja, can I invite you, please?
(Applause)
And Qin.
(Applause)
We won't have the photo opportunity for Tommy and Cullen, but I think maybe somebody can make an AI-generated one.
(Laughter)
And with that, let's do introductions, and then we'll do open mic.
For introduction, let's start with Jason.
JASON LIVINGOOD: Jason Livingood, IAB.
MARK NOTTINGHAM: Mark Nottingham, IAB.
MIRJA KÜHLEWIND: Mirja Kühlewind, outgoing IAB.
SURESH KRISHNAN: Suresh Krishnan, IAB.
WARREN KUMARI: Warren Kumari, in a surprising turn of events, IAB.
YAROSLAV ROSOMAKHO: Yaroslav Rosomakho, incoming IAB.
DHRUV DODY: Dhruv Dody, incoming IAB Chair.
ALVARO RETANA: Alvaro Retana, IAB.
YINGZHEN QU: Yingzhen Qu, incoming IAB.
DIRK KUTSCHER: Dirk Kutscher, IRTF Chair.
QIN WU: Qin, outgoing IAB.
DHRUV DHODY: Can we have remote folks? Ali? Is Ali on the screen?
ALI BEGEN: Yes, sorry, sorry. Can you hear me now? Yes. Hello, this is Ali, Ali Begen, incoming IAB.
DHRUV DHODY: Thank you.
Cullen.
CULLEN JENNINGS: Fluffy, outgoing. Glad the fluffiness is remaining on the IAB. Thank you.
DHRUV DHODY: Do we have Jana? I didn't see Jana. Matthew.
MATTHEW BOCCI: Matthew Bocci, IAB.
DHRUV DHODY: Nick?
NICK SULLIVAN: Nick Sullivan, incoming IAB.
DHRUV DHODY: And, Roman, how can -- we are missing you. I think we can't hear you, Roman. Okay. Move on. Open mic. Questions for the IAB? And somebody will help me with the queue? Arnaud.
ARNAUD TADDEI: Congratulations to the new IABs, and thank you for those that are leaving. I just have a couple of points. The first one is to say that I really appreciate the progress done by IAB, especially on the liaison. I think Mirja and Suresh are working on that one, and I think this is really good. I have a few things that have emerged. The first one is speaking about liaison. I observed for certain areas the need to improve the collaboration framework. The liaisons are good, but they are just one part of the equation. We have seen in some areas like DIEM, between IETF and SG17, we started to have leadership that started to speak to each other. And I must say thank you to Jim Reid. I don't know where Jim is, but he was the one who pushed us here to do that, and that was good. We, however -- it's only this week I realized the difficulty to get people to work with each other. And not that people don't want, in fact, but people don't know, not only don't know but even I don't know. And I don't know how we are going to do it in terms of process, tools, et cetera. So that's probably something we should explore.
The second thing is that I was approached with a lot of questions after my side meeting. I would love the idea to be able to present what me or other groups are doing to the IAB, so that we can really intimately understand together how we work and what could be tangible actions we could do together.
Then the next point is about opportunities. There is going to be on the ITU side the plenipotentiary. We will see what happens. But that's a big opportunity for revising resolutions. And I want to come back on the workshop on Chinaland protection that the IAB promoted. Now, there is -- the window is slightly opened to make a change in this resolution. If you have some desires based on what you are doing, now is the moment. It never happened in years, and we managed to unlock the doors at member-state level. Now they know they are going to modify it. So if you want to seize this opportunity, do it.
The last point is about AI. Aye, aye, aye. Here the frustration are the friction of three IETF meetings, at each of them, at side meetings, that took away hundreds of people out of the mainstream. I can understand Madrid, okay. Montreal, hmm. Now, again, in fact, this week we did the first official meeting with the BoF CATALIST on agentic AI. So the problem is timing. And so if you move your brain to what's going to happen next and you consider a number of risks, including for San Francisco in November, that tells us that we have a problem to bootstrap ourselves in. I am doing on my side three meetings, one plenary, and one content week from now until next July. So it's an offer. I can offer a platform for anybody to discuss the things we could not discuss in the side meetings. Seize it, because this will give you input to prepare the July meeting in Vienna. We must have something concrete in Vienna, because if San Francisco is risky, that's the only moment we can do something. So we better organize ourselves and get our act together to say exactly what we do in Vienna. And I would bring all the input you need. Let's make it happen. So I know it's a lot of things. You don't need to answer now, but these are things we can do offline later.
DHRUV DHODY: Thank you, Arnaud. Let me echo just a few points very quickly. We will not go in depth for all of them. With respect to liaisons, I completely agree. The first thing that we have to do is relationship. I think that's when we do best when we have people who are participating in both organizations and when we have that. So any ideas that you have in which we can make sure that people find each other and we can opt to discuss. We can, of course, maybe get some better tooling, whichever you have that we find people, reach out to us. We want to do this better. With AI, the last question, I think will I leave that to IESG.
From the IAB side, I think we are watching. We helped during the BoF preparation with CATALIST, with other things; so we are watching. But that question specifically, with side meeting and everything, it's for the IESG. So hold onto that.
Remind me. What were the two other questions? ITU PP. Thank you for bringing it up. We have plans to participate. We are discussing. There's still a lot of inputs coming in. Let's continue the conversation. Does any other IAB member want to add? Please go ahead.
MIRJA KÜHLEWIND: I actually appreciate that you are coming here and you are driving this way forward. Like, you are helping us to have this exchange with relevant groups in ITU. I think actually that works very well. As Dhruv said, if we need to improve, we can do that. But I'm actually very positive that I am seeing that. So thank you for that.
ARNAUD TADDEI: There is one regret I have, just that I can say that. Tommy and I discussed an idea for a workshop on agentic AI. That would have helped remove a lot of heat and get the debates on. We didn't do it. I don't know why it happened. That's something that the IAB could help. Now it's too late, but we have another way. We can do it for July.
For the liaison piece, in fact, there is something that is simply a lack of practice in terms of the community here to understand the consensus to answer a liaison statement, because for us, sometimes tell us "don't do it." That would help us enormously because until we receive something from the community here saying, "ITU, don't do that," I cannot show that to member states. So there is a few simple things that if the leadership works together, we can pass through the message and help you organize that. It's easy. We not take too much time, and everybody will be happy.
DHRUV DHODY: I think we have made a bunch of improvements. On that, we have been sending acknowledgments at least, as well as nudging various groups where action is needed. But as we have discussed this multiple times, it's just a very different fundamental way the two organizations work. We have to find a middle ground. Let's continue to talk. That's what I can offer. Any other? We have one more person, but I can't see the name. Andrew.
ANDREW CAMPLING: (indiscernible) -- in Shenzhen. I just wanted to (indiscernible) -- for their work in the last two, three years on outreach. It has made a difference, and it has shifted the reputation of the community significantly in other bodies. So thank you for doing that. And please continue.
DHRUV DHODY: Thank you, Andrew. I didn't catch everything, but it seemed like you were happy so that's good.
(Laughter)
Anyone else? Otherwise, going once. Going twice. And IESG.
(Applause)
ROMAN DANYLIW: I would welcome the incoming and outgoing IESG to the stage.
All right. As we've heard in some of the other leadership bodies, now is the time in March where we have the leadership turnover. And here in the IESG, we have three outgoing members that I have had the distinct pleasure of serving with.
First, Erik Kline is our outgoing Internet Area Director who has served three terms. Now, Erik, it has been a pleasure to serve with you because you have had a ruthless practicality on the IESG. You have helped us through some tough deliberations. And whether you know it or not, you implicitly defined how we productively use meeting time, which is the metric of "is this topic worth waking up the U.S. West Coast and keeping Europe up to have on the agenda." And this other kind of approach, practical approach, got us great working groups that had a fundamentally differing kind of arrangement, like BPF, where we merged the open source community activities with the strengths of what the IETF works on. The IESG is going to miss you and how you have kept us really focused. So thank you for your service. And we are virtually giving you a plaque, and we will send one in the mail to you.
Next up is Orie Steele, who is the outgoing Application and Realtime director who served one term. Orie, you are, in a sense, the triple threat. You masqueraded as the ART AD but you were also the Shadow SEC and WIT AD with your deep knowledge of application kind of stats. This really helped us with all sorts of different work. I think everyone would agree we have at the intersection of those three areas, which is why we even have a consolidated DISPATCH session. The IESG is also going to miss your extensive knowledge about what's happening in other SDOs and in the open source community. So, Orie, really, thank you so much for your service.
And last up is Paul Wouters, who is the outgoing Security Area Director. He served two terms. So I can do this a lot of different ways. But, Paul, first up, I want to say thank you for being a colleague and a great sounding board. It takes two to run a SEC area. So being a SEC area AD with you was great because you pushed us in the area to think differently about how to manage the area. How we did it before is not necessarily how we should do it in the future. So kind of, first, thank you for that. I also wanted to mention, like, your community -- your outlook on ensuring that the community is welcoming. We think about newcomers in our processes and procedures, has also really pushed us forward to getting a broader perspective on all the work that's happening. And in terms of meeting efficiency in the IESG, you may have actually left the largest legacy, which puts us in a bit of a problem right now. I suspect that the IESG productivity is going to take a hit because we may have to drop our standards on acceptable caffeine and coffee that you kept at a very high standard, which very much helped us get things done. So thank you for that. And in all seriousness, thank you very much for your service as well, Paul. Thank you to all of you outgoing ADs.
(Applause)
So, Orie, we have a plaque for you in person.
And, Paul, we will mail something to you as well.
(Applause)
All right. So we have historically had the transition. If we can have the next slide, the passing of the dots. The dots are getting passed from incoming -- from outgoing to incoming in the new roles. We have a hybrid, of course, as you can see kind of on the stage. So we're going to do introductions in the order that they appear on the screen. And, Charles, you are going to get us started.
CHARLES ECKEL: Okay, everyone. I'm Charles Eckel, incoming ART AD.
ANDY NEWTON: Andy Newton, ART AD.
ORIE STEELE: Orie Steele, outgoing ART AD.
ROMAN DANYLIW: Roman Danyliw, GEN.
TOMMY JENSEN: Tommy Jensen, incoming INT AD.
ROMAN DANYLIW: Erik, your turn.
ERIK KLINE: Erik Kline, INT AD. Sorry.
ÉRIC VYNCKE: Éric Vyncke, the other outgoing INT AD. And by the way, stepping down next year. So if you want to serve as INT AD, please talk to me.
MAHESH JETHANADANI: Mahesh, management side of OPS AD.
JIM GUICHARD: Jim Guichard, Routing AD.
KETAN TALAULIKAR: Ketan Talaulikar, Routing AD.
GUNTER VAN de VELDE: Gunter Van de Velde, outgoing and incoming Routing AD.
MOHAMED BOUCADAIR: Mohamed Boucadair, OPS AD.
DEB COOLEY: Deb Cooley, SEC AD.
CHRIS INACIO: Chris Inacio, SEC AD.
MIKE BISHOP: Mike Bishop, WIT AD.
GORRY FAIRHURST: Gorry Fairhurst, renewing AD for WIT.
ROMAN DANYLIW: Tommy?
Tommy, didn't have a chance to turn on his video. So Tommy Pauly is the outgoing IAB Chair. Things should be more streamlined after the turnover. We are going to be down to only one Tommy and one Erik.Okay. So the mic line is open. Questions for the IESG?Pete, I see you are in the queue.
PETE RESNICK: No one wants to be first. I will be first. Hopefully, a straightforward one, although it might involve the IAB as well. Both DISPATCH on Monday and CATALIST later in the week made me think that perhaps a little bit of a template or preset of slides for folks who are presenting new ideas might be a good thing. A lot of the comments, both in the room and especially on the Zulip chat, were very much: Who is going to be implementing this? Are they here? What problem of interoperability are you solving? These should be pretty obvious questions for BoF proponents and/or DISPATCHers to answer. But I don't know that we necessarily have enough push. On the BoF side, IAB tends to do pretty well of getting them in line as the helpers. But especially in DISPATCH, that doesn't happen as much. And if they can't answer those questions, it's probably not time to present. So I was wondering if you all would be on board, with in your sort of DISPATCH groups and BoFs, taking on something like that. And I realize that means I probably volunteered to write some text.
ANDY NEWTON: Did you just say you will volunteer to write some text? (laughter) I think that's a great idea. It's my understanding that the DISPATCH chairs do give a template to the presenters and they ask them to follow that template. But I agree that we probably do need some -- another type of form or something like that to fill out. So we should take that and try to work on it.
ROMAN DANYLIW: Does anyone else from the IESG have any comments? Any of the owners of the DISPATCH working groups?
CHRIS INACIO: We will definitely take that feedback. We have already kind of had that conversation on the side about how do we improve those templates and give stronger guidance so that we can do that. We have heard that kind of welcome contributions and participations for the community to help us with that. But I think some of those questions are pretty well known. We just need to make it stronger to get it out there so that people answer those questions.
ROMAN DANYLIW: Okay. Thanks for that concrete suggestion, Pete. I think you're going to see it's going to be a work in progress, and we're going to work across the DISPATCH groups to tighten that up, realizing the DISPATCH is a critical mechanism to onboard new work because we get broad kind of visibility. And it's a structured process to bring people in the organization. Next up, Arnaud, I see you are in the queue as well.
ARNAUD TADDEI: Yes, Roman. I just realized you were not here yesterday. As Dhruv has sent a question on my critique regarding the way we managed the agentic AI situation, so if it would be my study group, people would say Chair was the way forward. My complaint here a little bit is that three meetings, with three side meetings, at this level of entropy that is created and, in fact, it is good that people could discuss about it but we cannot take action. We cannot have consensus. We cannot organize ourselves. We are not creating charters. So that's a lot of time that we lost. Again, we need to have something just from a timing perspective in July. That means it's from now to July to do something. And to be very direct, I would like to see a little bit more prescription -- just to use that word from the leadership here -- to say the guidance is this. Whatever you guys want to do, I don't care. But I think we need to be a bit more driven to stop this entropy level. So thoughts?
ROMAN DANYLIW: Yeah, I would say we have heard from multiple angles, Arnaud, loud and clear that there's a tremendous amount of interest and passion in all dimensions of AI; and there's a tremendous amount of that happening in the side meeting. I think the observation you are making is that we need a more structural approach to facilitate the onboarding of all of that energy and excitement that's not in the official process into the official process. And, in a sense, how do we do that? Recognizing that we have certain strengths in the IETF with how we run things with the tightly bound charters and what is the approach to onramp it in there. The BoF that we just had in CATALIST is one of, I'm sure, many things we need to do. This is going to be a topic that the IESG takes up at its strategy meeting/offsite about how to convert the energy not just in AI in side meetings, into structural things in the standards process.
ORIE STEELE: Roman, I just want to make one other comment on the subject of meeting between IETFs. We do have the capacity to do virtual interim BoFs. It's a relatively new procedure. I have only seen one of them before. Francesca, previous ART AD, helped set that up. So if that's something that your communities or groups that have been meeting in side meetings would like to make use of, I volunteer my two fellow ART ADs to take your requests. But I do think meetings between meetings is something we should definitely be considering, given the level of interest. Thanks.
ARNAUD TADDEI: Thanks, Orie. So I cannot do that for you. I don't know enough what's possible. But that's a new possibility. Just as a point of benchmark -- I know I have a live which is a bit more complicated here because of member states. We had the first meeting on a agentic AI this week thanks to Adrian and the team on the CATALIST. Great job. That's step one. For me step one started December 24. In 15 months, I am where I am; but it took me 15 months of work to get consensus, alignments, understanding, creation, restructuring. So just think about the time it takes to get there. Time is evaporating. The industry is burning billions of frictions at the moment. We have a societal problem. We have other requirements that have not been taken into account. There's a cultural issue with people with too much on the engineering side, on the bottom-up portion that don't see certain requirements. So we have a lot of things to do. Please consider as well other SDOs working in this space so that we can accelerate each other. That's my message. Thank you.
ROMAN DANYLIW: Yeah, strongly agree. To solve the AI problem or AI kind of standardization is going to take not only this organization but it's going to be in partnership with many of the other SDOs and professional kind of organizations and open source to kind of get us there. Okay. Thank you. So, Aijun, you are next in the queue.
AIJUN WANG: Aijun Wang from China Telecom. I have a similar concern for the working for agentic AI in IETF. In this meeting, there are about over 16 side meetings related to AI. And I think many of them -- many of them contain or overlapped. So I think it is necessary to determine quickly how they put forward this work in more formal manners. Okay.
ROMAN DANYLIW: Thank you. Thank you, kind of, for that feedback. Again, to repeat a little bit of what I said kind of prior, the CATALIST BoF is certainly one attempt to think through how do we onboard things out of the side meetings. I would also reiterate that AI is not a homogenous topic. It intersects many, if not all, of the areas we already have. If the topics that we want to bring in are intersections of the existing work that -- of the existing areas that we have, each one of those has some mechanism to onboard, whether it's DISPATCH process or DISPATCH-like working groups. So we should also leverage those processes. Just because, again, something is AI, it does not necessarily require a special onboarding path.Martin.
MARTIN DUKE: Martin Duke. Contrary to popular belief, I'm not in Tokyo. I was present at the creation of the mega DISPATCH experiment however many IETFs ago that was. And I kind of feel like the -- I'm very -- I'm conscious probably more than most people how hard it is to schedule all the sessions in an IETF, but I think we are drifting away from some of the things we are trying to achieve in that. In particular -- the original concept was there be no counterprogramming to DISPATCH at all on Monday morning. That proved to be too hard. I think pretty quickly we collapsed that to really self-contained groups that really have no interaction with everything else. We really wanted to keep it clear for the power users -- for the power IETF users to be able to go to DISPATCH and comment on new work. I happen to be Chair of MOQ now. My working group has actually moved to Monday morning. It contains many IETF power users. It moved back for other reasons that were kind of unrelated to this. I just want to leave the comment with IESG. Let's try to preserve that model for DISPATCH to really get a lot of good cross-area review of these new ideas. Thanks.
ROMAN DANYLIW: Yeah, thank you. Thank you, Martin. Where we ended up based on the large DISPATCH experiment that you were intimately involved in is that the community did not want to glom all the areas kind of together. So we, of course, have ended up with a federated approach where certain areas are teaming up together, like SEC, WIT, and ART, but the other areas are distinct. So we're doing our best to schedule to the degree possible for that deconfliction. Okay, next up Roberta. You are next in the queue.
ROBERTA ROBERT: Hi. I have a question related to maybe foundational knowledge for some of the issues that we have with AI. I don't know if we have some structure that we could enter information -- like, information about areas that might not be appliable (phonetic) to the engineering work, specifically that would be the known working groups. That might be foundational to people comprehend some of the terms that has connection with it. For example, for agentic AI agents and AI itself, where would be the place for you to put information related to how agents work and that part of the foundational models, those kind of informations that might make difference for the way that people do drafts? Is there a place that we can join information and do maybe a state-of-art of some of the terms and things that are happening in the area and how people are applying it and engineering on top of it?
ROMAN DANYLIW: I don't pretend to understand all the dimensions of the information that you want to capture. But if you're asking for what would be -- what would be an organizational kind of mechanism to capture things that you think are cross-cutting and have that as a durable artifact that you can trade and ship into different forums inside the IETF, I think the answer would be to produce an ID, an Internet draft, and write that down and update it periodically. So you would have the basis of bringing this to multiple discussions in the organization.
ROBERTA ROBERT: Thank you.
ÉRIC VYNCKE: On this same topic, if you allow me to add, even if you talk to one area director, they can easily refer you to others. I have done it multiple times. DIEM as an ART started in INT, for instance. So it is quite common. We talk to each other.
ROMAN DANYLIW: All right. So I'm seeing the queue line empty. Would anyone else like to jump in the queue to pose a question or make a comment? I'm pausing, waiting. James.
JAMES OLORUNDARE: (No audio).
ROMAN DANYLIW: James, we are getting a tremendous amount of feedback on your mic. I think we have a hot mic. James -- okay, you have dropped. Okay. Any other questions? Okay. In that case, IESG, thank you. And we will move to the next of our open mics.
(Applause)
MIRJAM KÜHNE: Hello. I hope you can hear me. This is the LLC's open mic. If all is well, George and Gonzalo will make their way to the stage while Roman and I are remote. There's Jay. I can see you taking seats. Taking up your seats. Great. Thanks. I think we are ready. Do you want to do a quick introduction, please, on stage, starting with George?
GEORGE MICHAELSON: George Michaelson, LLC Board.
GONZALO CAMARILLO: Gonzalo Camarillo, LLC Board.
JAY DALEY: Jay Daley, IETF Executive Director.
MIRJAM KÜHNE: Then we have you, Roman.
ROMAN DANYLIW: Roman Danyliw, LLC Board.
MIRJAM KÜHNE: Mirjam Kühne, LLC Board. I have a list of people in the queue. Rahul, you can go first, please.
RAHUL GUPTA: My camera is facing the wrong way. I want to raise a question that relates to the in-person fee waiver. I find that the process -- the decisions are made very late. And the processes, as designed, are more suited for North American and European audiences rather than us who are living in Asia, because even for me to travel to a neighboring country -- I'm in India, I need to travel to China -- I need a visa. And that process takes easily one to two months. And for that reason, I had made a request for a fee waiver all the way back the previous IETF. I had explained the reasons why I'm making and that I need a decision at least two months in advance. I had also said if you cannot meet that time line, can you please communicate to me in advance itself that it's not possible for you to make that decision. Unfortunately, I basically had to withdraw my request because it had come to one month and it was not possible for me to apply for a visa and then arrange for last-minute travel, because even last-minute travel is a barrier due to the higher prices. And in general, this is not just a request for me, because more and more students from, for example, India, people who are working independently like me, are going to want to come to IETF. I have been bringing work consistently to IETF. So I'm hoping that we can move the process in a way that the needs of us in the Global South can be accommodated.
Also, I just want to make a shout-out to the IRTF because IRTF, I learned, have a similar situation. Actually did move their processes back by a month so that people make their applications earlier so that the visas can be accommodated. Thank you.
ROMAN DANYLIW: So Let me take that question, Mirjam, because this isn't an LLC matter. This is an IETF Chair matter. Thank you for that feedback. You're exactly right, the IRTF process is different from the IESG process for the fee waivers. And the published approach for the things giving out by the IETF Chair is one month out. And that's largely historically been done to use those fee waivers to patch over unexpected circumstances, not as a long-term kind of sustainment and grant kind of opportunity, the same way the IRTF is run. So they are very fundamentally kind of different approaches for why those fee waivers are handed out.
But your observation that some of the venues that we visit have long-term visa -- have longer-range kind of visa challenges, so may need time for that paperwork to be processed, I am going take that feedback and look at the specific guidance that we have created around that.
And I won't commit to anything here, but my early kind of thinking on that is to issue those fee waivers in two tranches. One to continue doing it as a relatively close to the meeting matter to help patch over unexpected circumstances but to also potentially manage -- to do an early tranche of approvals because I am starting to get them earlier and earlier after typically a meeting ends and before the next one starts to accommodate some of the challenges that you are describing.
So stay tuned. Thank you for bringing that to my attention.
MIRJAM KÜHNE: Thanks. Next up is Mark.
MARK NOTTINGHAM: Hi. Mark Nottingham. In the presentation, we said the Secretariat contract is still being renegotiated. I think we heard the same thing in Montreal. Can you communicate anything about why that is. Are there major sticking points?
JAY DALEY: No. We can't explain anything about it.
MARK NOTTINGHAM: So no to the first part but not to the second?
JAY DALEY: No to the first one and no to the second one.
MARK NOTTINGHAM: So there aren't any sticking points?
JAY DALEY: Sorry? There are no -- everything is continuing smoothly. These things just take some time.
MARK NOTTINGHAM: Okay. Thanks.
MIRJAM KÜHNE: Thanks, Jay. Next up is Andrew.
ANDREW CAMPLING: Hi, good morning. Good evening, rather. I hope you can hear me. I just want to say I was in the ICANN meeting in Mumbai last week, which was a fantastic meeting at a great venue. ICANN's agenda is probably similarly complex to the IETF's. Yet, from my perspective, the meeting worked very well. So I just wanted to urge the IETF to consider India as a future venue. I think it would be excellent for us to go there. And ICANN has proven it's easily possible to do so. Thank you.
MIRJAM KÜHNE: Thanks for that feedback, Andrew. That's good to hear. Pete?
PETE RESNICK: Hi. In the past couple of weeks actually, once on mailing lists and once today in the working group chairs session, Jay has made some comments which at least are interpretable as the IETF LLC is the IETF. For some of us old crusty folks, that's not a great confusion to leave out there in the world. That the SDO is completely independent of the LLC is sort of part of the charter of the LLC. That there should be no way to influence the IETF because of something that's going on with the LLC. While the LLC does serve as a corporate sort of shell for the IETF, as far as I know, the IETF still isn't incorporated as an SDO. And I am hoping you all can clear up whether that's just soft talk, which is okay, although I would prefer we keep it sharper, or if I'm missing something.
MIRJAM KÜHNE: Thanks for bringing this up, Pete. I wasn't there. I don't know exactly what you are referring to and if there's any confusion. I don't know, Jay, if you want to comment on that. But I don't think we would say the LLC equals the IETF, no.
JAY DALEY: So to be clear, Pete, I wasn't saying that the IETF LLC is an SDO. What I was saying was that the IETF LLC is constructed to, at times, be the LLC -- sorry, to at times be the IETF. The example I gave to you was if somebody takes legal action against the IETF, then the LLC will be there in court as the IETF. It will not be the 7,000 individual participants that turn up. And it will not be on behalf of those, because those people have no legal liability or anything in those cases. It will be the IETF LLC. This is a construct that we have created that has multiple moving parts to it. The IETF LLC is one of those moving parts. The community has created it and controls it and has given it a role. And at times in that role, it has to be the IETF.
The other one I gave you, the example, was the trading name, that the IETF LLC can use that trading name as the IETF for things, okay? So what I'm suggesting -- what I'm saying clearly is that this is actually quite a complex situation. And to say that that nuanced view that I gave you is the LLC trying to claim to be the SDO is not what, in any way, I think could be reasonably interpreted from that.
PETE RESNICK: The problem I have is if the IETF, the SDO, was dragged into court for some reason, I believe the LLC would go to court. I don't think that makes the LLC the IETF. The IETF, the SDO, is those 7,000 individuals. Now, I don't know how a court deals with that problem. But at least within the community, there's got to be a sharp distinction between the LLC and the IETF, the SDO. And if for purposes of contracting and other things, a DBA does not bother me. If the IETF LLC goes out and has to sign a contract and say it is doing business as the IETF, whatever. That's a business relationship. But in this community, when speaking in this community, making a very clear distinction between the LLC and the SDO, I think, is important. And I think talking about the LLC as the IETF within this community is actually making a mistake.
MIRJAM KÜHNE: Thanks for pointing this out, Pete. I don't know how to respond to this at this stage. I wasn't in there when the comments were made, but we'll discuss this and how to make sure to not come across this as confusing, apparently. Thanks, Jean.
JEAN-FRANCOIS QUERALT: Hi, thanks. Jean-Francois Queralt. My comment is corresponding to what has been mentioned in terms of difficulties with the visas. In our particular case, we had two students from India who were scheduled to come here as fellows. Unfortunately, we just got their approval two days too late corresponding to their flights. That's the way it goes. I was only wondering when the venue was analyzed whether specific long holidays were considered in terms of how we apply to visas. What we discovered -- This is our fault. We did not pay attention to that Chinese New Year was right in the middle. And so for 10, 12 days the embassy was closed in Delhi. That just delayed the whole thing. What otherwise would have been a process that would have taken a reasonable amount of time and just in time to get the visas done, because of the closure, it became the main problem. I am just wondering if that was ever part of the thinking process. And if not, whether it would be something you guys would like to incorporate in future evaluations just to make sure that those kind of big gaps may not get into on the way.
MIRJAM KÜHNE: Thanks, Jean. I'm not sure exactly if that's part of the checklist for the meeting, for the planning, but it's a good point. We can -- it's probably not always going to be possible to add this into the planning cycle, but it's definitely something we can take into account.
JEAN-FRANCOIS QUERALT: Thank you.
MIRJAM KÜHNE: Who is next? Eric.
ERIC RESCORLA: Hi. So there was quite a bit of discussion prior to this meeting about the suitability of this venue and whether people could attend. I can't help noticing that in many of the meetings I'm in, the majority of the participants were remote and also a huge amount of leadership. Including, by my count, the majority of the IESG and the IAB are remote. Do you have any comments?
MIRJAM KÜHNE: Do we have any comments about what exactly?
ERIC RESCORLA: About the suitability of this venue in light of those facts.
MIRJAM KÜHNE: I can point you to Roman's statistics that he showed earlier on the slides and distribution of remote and onsite compared to other meetings. I can also say that I notice that remote participation seems to work really well actually, especially also for myself.
ERIC RESCORLA: I guess I'm asking you specifically about the participation of the core leadership of this organization, including you, by the way, I would notice.
MIRJAM KÜHNE: Yes, including myself. And I am participating remotely. This is not the only IETF I'm not participating in person. I guess it's up to everybody individually to decide that. Overall, I think the venue was suitable. There are a lot of people onsite, especially from the country and neighboring countries. That seems to have worked out well. I don't know if there are any other comments from other Board members.
ROMAN DANYLIW: Since the IESG was mentioned, speaking from that, there definitely is not the full complement of the IESG here in person. We discussed this with ourselves in planning for that. As I had in my plenary slide, almost all of us are sponsored by kind of someone. And our ability to travel and participate in different -- in different venues is kind of contingent on said approval. And a number of parties at least on the IESG -- I won't speak for the other leadership bodies -- were not approved. And this is what that turnout looks like.
We are waiting -- from the IESG side at least, we are waiting for the post-meeting survey to get feedback on what was the experience of kind of all the participants. In particular, we're looking for some of the productivity measures that are reported back for the in-person survey. So we are going to have some -- as an after-action some perspective on what those experiences are. From the very quick looks we had, participation may also be uneven across areas about how much remote and onsite. But it's just too early for us to say from the data that we have right now.
MIRJAM KÜHNE: Thank you. Any other comments? I don't see any on the stage. Next, we have Rahul again.
RAHUL GUPTA: Building on my question as well as Jean-Francois' question, is there any long-term consideration by IETF on the venue based on visa requirements? Because just, for example, here, if the meeting was not in Shenzhen but in Hong Kong, traveling would become so much easier for a lot of us who weaker passports. I understand the host would have some considerations. But in, general, in the long term -- Again, Bangkok was a very suitable venue that way because the visa requirements were so liberal. So I'm wondering if you have any thoughts on that.
MIRJAM KÜHNE: As you've already hinted, it may be also dependent on the host to a certain extent and finding venues, et cetera. And also, I think, what we've explained earlier in similar discussions is that it's also important to make sure we're kind of distributing the pain, if you will, and make it easier for people who have difficulties getting visas go to other countries. So in this case, a large group of participants from China, hopefully, had it easier to participate. And so I think it's important to ensure that not the same group of people gets hit by difficulties each time. I hear you. It's difficult to find the perfect venue in that respect. No other comments from our side, I think, on that. Arnaud.
ARNAUD TADDEI: Hi, Mirjam. Strange to see you again after two weeks ago we were together. So I'm not sure what Eric tried to say in his comment, but I will take the opportunity just to express my very high satisfaction of being here. It was my leanest experience to coming to China. I think the passport, getting the new visa and all of that, was extremely good. And frankly speaking, it's delightful. My first time in Shenzhen, I see absolutely no issue. I see the weather is fantastic. The welcome from the Chinese colleagues is excellent. We have had an amazing social event. We are doing our work normally. It's a pity that some of you cannot be there. I can understand some of you have some limits by your own corporations for other reasons. That's bad. But, again, we should not let geopolitics come into this organization. We should not. Very simple. We have enough problems on that, and we are going to see what happens in November. I'm really curious. But we should not allow that to continue. That will be a dangerous path for the IETF to continue in this direction. So that's one comment. So thank you for organizing this. It must have been a long way for our host to do all of this work, and I'm very happy to be here and to do our work as normal.
The second thing I would like to say as well is to come back on Pete's comment. I think Pete makes a very important point. We should not confuse the two sides, and we should be very, very clear on the demarcation that he mentioned. Thank you.
MIRJAM KÜHNE: Thanks, Arnaud. Jason.
JASON LIVINGOOD: Hi, Jason Livingood. This is in response to Pete's question. I will first say I'm not totally clear on what the confusion is, because I wasn't in any of those meetings when I heard things say. But I would encourage people to reread RFC 8711. Pretty straightforward. And Section 4-3, that LLC is established to provide administrative support to the IETF; has no authority over the standards development activities of the IETF; and it focuses on operations like organizing this meeting, fund-raising like having fund-raisers and so on, compliance, and its legal home. So it was the case way back before the IASA2 activity that the standards development practice was like this amorphous thing without a legal home that was undefined and weird. That's not the case anymore. It was put underneath a legal umbrella, kind of protected by this limited liability corporation. But it was also clear when the function was established that there would be a separation between the standards development activities, which are dependent and operated by the IESG and so on and so forth, and then you had this legal structure. So the docs are pretty clear, but I'm not clear on whatever the questions were. It might be worth having a side bar if there's confusion. And happy to help because, unfortunately, I think I might have been involved in some.
MIRJAM KÜHNE: Yes. Thanks, Jason. Thanks for clarifying this. Yes, you have done a tremendous job in your term on the LLC Board. Thanks for pointing to that RFC. Are there any comments from any of us on stage? No? Seeing none, next up is Vittorio.
VITTORIO BERTOLA: Hi, Vittorio Bertola. I didn't plan to come to the mic. I did want to offer a different perspective to what [Eric Rescorla] said. I think -- and also to some of the comments I have read in the chat. I think having a large meeting with a large number of newcomers is not a negative thing, even if it means many of them are remote. I think this is exactly the purpose why organizations like the IETF or international organizations meet in new places. It is exactly to give a chance to people who would not otherwise have had a chance to come to the meeting, to come at least one time in person and discover this world. Maybe they will continue. It is up to us -- meaning the regulars. I don't know if I'm a regular by now. Not up to the newcomers to find ways to continue to keep them engaged and turn them into regular contributors. And to this -- for a certain extent, it was -- in multiple sessions, I saw drafts presented by newcomers being met with the usual, unfortunately, attitude by IETF regulars of [condescension] or outright hostility or just go away. I know IETF has been putting effort into changing this kind of attitude, but it's still there. This was clearly perceivable in several sessions. So in the end, yes, it's also said, honestly, that there are so many members of the leadership here. I'm sure they had all very good reasons not to be here. But the fact that we had the largest meeting of the IETF ever and possibly the meeting with so little -- maybe the smallest participation of leadership ever is something we have to think about. I think -- I'm sure all of you made all possible efforts to be here in person, but still the result is not satisfactory maybe. Thank you.
MIRJAM KÜHNE: Thanks for your comment, Vittorio. Rohan.
ROHAN MAHY: Yeah, I support the fact that we came to China. And several of us have reasons from either employers or personal reasons why we couldn't attend this meeting. So people will have similar reasons why they will not be able to attend in San Francisco. And there will be other destinations that will be difficult for some other folks. It's getting harder for us to have one place where we can all go. We need to just suck it up, okay? Just let -- let the process run. We need to recognize there's a lot of good faith going on here and not beat up everyone. Unless you have a concrete, good suggestion for where we can go that is going to meet all of the requirements and is going to allow this regular change of venue so that things are convenient for different people and different continents. We just need to be a little more flexible and be a little more kind to each other. Thank you.
MIRJAM KÜHNE: Thank you. Thanks for that comment. Roberta?
ROBERTA ROBERTS: Hey, folks. I don't know if this is the right place to ask this, but I have a concern going to United States because even though if you have applied for a visa and you have a visa in United States, it can be -- you can be retained over there. I wanted to know if the organization is already planning to have like some kind of support for people that are going over there that are afraid because it's -- for any reason why, right, I used to be a Mexico, so I got some personal interest at least going on. So I wanted to ask do the organization have support for people that could be detained without any reason when arriving in the United States? And what are you planning as the country is in war right now, right? So how it's going to be support for attendees?
MIRJAM KÜHNE: Yeah, thanks for bringing this up. I know people are concerned. We discussed this before. And you know, similar to this meeting, I believe it's for everybody individual to decide what the risks are and if you can make it or not. I'm not aware, Jay, I don't know if you want to comment on that, if you can provide any legal support for individuals. I don't think we've done that in the past, at least.
JAY DALEY: Roberta, no. Unfortunately, that's not something we can do. It's too expensive. The liability is unlimited. It really has to be left to the individuals to do that themselves.
ROBERTA ROBERT: My biggest concern is during the visa process, might be everything okay. And then, we arrive over there, and I have some instances of friends that have been, you know, detained and sometimes it's not just to go back home. It's over there -- it's more if we risk it, the organization might at least know that we are there, you know? But thank you.
JAY DALEY: We are effectively a business conference in terms of visas. And if people are applying for a business conference visa or that type of visa to come here for that purpose -- sorry, coming to the U.S. for that purpose, not coming to work or anything like that, then, you know, there are very, in fact I'm not aware of any instances of somebody going through that process that has been detained. All of the issues have been about immigration status and work status within the country, not people coming to this sort of thing.
ROBERTA ROBERT: I thank you for the comment, but actually I have instances because of DEF CON and everything that has happened outside of this. I'm really sorry but thank you for the position. Thank you.
WARREN KUMARI: I think I'm next.
MIRJAM KÜHNE: Yes.
WARREN KUMARI: Just a quick follow-on from what Arnaud said. I found this to be a great venue. Everything has worked really nicely. People have been great. Yes, it was annoying to have to get a visa, but it turns out that's what most people have to do for most countries. So we have a lot of people participants from China. This, I think, is the right thing to do, and good on us.
(Applause)
MIRJAM KÜHNE: Thanks, Warren. Martin?
MARTIN THOMSON: Hi. So I'm not sure that the LLC Board has really listened to the community when it comes to either China or the U.S. And I would suggest that geopolitics is very much a big factor of what we have to deal with as one of the factors in making decisions. And I think that those people who have suggested otherwise are denying reality to some extent. So I would like to sort of ask whether or not you consider this particular meeting to be a success in that regard? And think about metrics that matter as opposed to the numbers of people that turn up. If people are looking to continue participation, you know, the 400-ish people attend in-person this time, if those people continue to participate, then maybe that would be a success. If they do not, then maybe we can learn something from that. So I suggest someone track that. Thank you.
MIRJAM KÜHNE: Thanks for that suggestion. Yeah, we can definitely evaluate at this point. But yeah, I don't know if anybody else wants to comment on that. Nope. Then Richard.
RICHARD BARNES: Hi there. Is my media working now?
MIRJAM KÜHNE: Yes.
RICHARD BARNES: It's an excellent privilege what I'm about to say. I wanted to push back on Arnaud's point this is about geopolitics. I actually come to the opposite conclusion of Martin about politics being important. I think the IESG and the LLC were correct in their discussion of with community about this leading up to this selection that effectiveness and the ability to get to the work of the organization done is the right lone star to have. And while I agree with Roman finding place where we can be effective is getting harder over time as geopolitics intrudes on our work more and more, I think there's been some really unique challenges with this venue that don't exist other places in the world. The regulatory impositions we've seen with regard to the network are fairly unique if you look at it in a global context.
So I would encourage the IESG and the LLC to take a careful and close look in retrospect at this meeting and the challenges we faced and to take that into account as you look for future venue selections, whether the sorts of challenges we've seen this week are likely to occur in other places and whether we're going to be able to be effective with the venues we select.
MIRJAM KÜHNE: Yeah, thanks for the suggestion, Richard. We'll definitely doing that, like with any other venue that we're going to.
ROMAN DANYLIW: Mirjam, if I might on that particular topic. Richard, you highlight kind of a good point, which is that -- about kind of what might be unique challenges and is there, after every meeting, a learning experience on is there something that we learned here that might drive how we choose venues again in future. So I would invite everyone that has interest in venue selection criteria to come to GEN Dispatch. Tomorrow, we have a draft being presented on the topic of network requirements. And if the community wants to sharpen what's required for the network for the meeting, this draft is one potential version of what that might kind of look like. So please come to that discussion. The LLC I think ultimately will act on whatever is the community's consensus -- the community consensus on what should be the venue selection criteria.
RICHARD BARNES: Thanks for my draft, Roman. I wanted to flag that a bit more broadly though for the IESG and LLC. The question was posed to the LLC and to the IESG: Will this meeting be effective? There was a proactive prediction that you guys were asked to make. So I think as you're having board meetings, IESG retreats, things like that, I think it would be useful for you, these are bodies internally to do some introspection as to whether those predictions turned out to be accurate or whether you might make different decisions in future.
MIRJAM KÜHNE: Yeah, thanks for that addition. Tony.
TONY LI: Hi. I'm an American. The way the United States Government is operating right now, the IETF cannot protect anyone. The government is running around, basically, bands of thugs, and they are detaining anyone and everyone that they find objectionable. We've seen them detain citizens. We've seen them detain people who are legally there. There's nothing that's going to happen legally that's going to protect anyone who comes to the U.S.
MIRJAM KÜHNE: Thanks, Tony. Yeah, I don't have a comment on this at this stage. Thanks for this piece of information. Anyone else wants to comment? Nope. then I see one more, Benjamin.
BENJAMIN KURTIS: As a new participant in meetings with the IETF, the one thing that I have learned, at least from many of you, is that work at the IETF happens on the mailing list. So to me, looking at the number of new participants within this group, these are a lot of people that I would not have met going to another meeting, and there are a lot of people that in the future could then participate in the mailing lists that may have never done that had they not been able to attend otherwise. So I personally am happy with this venue choice and have had an excellent time here.
(Applause)
MIRJAM KÜHNE: That's great to hear. Thanks, Benjamin. I don't see anymore questions in the queue. A little over time, so I think that's it. Thank you all for joining and keeping around and have a great evening there if you're there in-person.
(Applause)
ROMAN DANYLIW: Mirjam, before we sign off, Jay do you want to repeat the social-focused activity tonight with the light show?
JAY DALEY: Yes.
ROMAN DANYLIW: That you sent out to the community.
JAY DALEY: This is a reminder that tonight we have a very special light show arranged by CNNIC and Huawei. So this will be starting at 8:00 p.m. for 15 minutes. There will be a light show projected across multiple buildings in the City Center as a welcome to the IETF. And I'm told the best place to see this from is the Civic Center where there will be music as well for that. So 8:00, it's about 10, 15 minutes' walk. We should see you all there.
(Applause)
Transcript Provided By:
Caption Pros
10105 E. Via Linda, Suite 103 PMB4
Scottsdale, Arizona 85258
www.captionpros.net
(With edits from Cindy Morgan)