Session Date/Time: 28 Jun 2023 14:00

DRIP

Summary

This DRIP interim meeting focused on the administrative and technical progress of core DRIP documents. Key discussions revolved around the acquisition of ICAO code points, the status of the authentication and registry drafts, and a significant discussion on the future scope and participation level of the working group. Concerns were raised regarding IAB-level guidance for IANA on IPv6 prefix delegation/allocation.

Key Discussion Points

Note Taker: Adam Montville volunteered to serve as note taker for the meeting.
Agenda Overview: The chairs outlined the agenda: discussion on ICAO code points, status of the registry and authentication drafts, and a session on the future of the working group.
ICAO Code Points Acquisition:
- Previous administrative discussions with IETF LLC (responsible for financial matters) and the IETF Trust (copyright, logos) regarding ICAO code points have been resolved, confirming ICAO code points typically do not fall under Trust copyright.
- The ICAO shop page (for purchasing code points) is currently experiencing technical difficulties.
- Once the ICAO shop page is functional, Eric Vyncke will send an email requesting the IETF LLC to purchase four ICAO code points for DRIP, costing $400.
- Upon acquisition, IANA will create a new registry page or update an existing one, copying relevant data and referencing ICAO as the source. Drafts will then be updated with these assigned code points.
- A liaison statement to ASTM for additional guidance is still desired but will not block the code point acquisition or draft progression.
- Adam Montville inquired whether the IANA registry setup would be part of the authentication draft. Eric Vyncke clarified that the ICAO provides the code points, and the draft editor (Adam) would then select and assign functions to these specific code points within the draft.
- It was confirmed that four code points (e.g., 0, 1, 2, 3 or similar) are expected.
- Once the authentication document is updated with the formal ICAO code points, a final review or "last call" (or direct threat review requests, especially from UPS) will be needed to ensure everything is in order.
- Adam Montville confirmed that the ASTM-specific session ID is already handled and integrated ("burned in") to the ASTM standard, thus not requiring new ICAO code points from this current request.
Authentication Document Status: Adam Montville is currently awaiting the ICAO code points to finalize updates to the authentication document; no other outstanding issues were noted for this draft.
Registry Document Status: Med (Daniel) reported being bogged down with other commitments but is making progress on review comments for the registry document. A new version is hoped to be published by the end of the week. Feedback on the resource record definition remains welcome.
Jim Reid's Email Issues: It was noted that Jim Reid's email server configuration causes IETF mailing list emails to bounce, leading to his removal from lists. Adam Montville committed to contacting Jim directly via another means to help him resolve this configuration issue. Jim subsequently joined the meeting and confirmed the problem was being sorted.
IPv6 Prefix Delegation and IANA Guidance:
- Jim Reid raised a concern about the lack of clear IAB-level guidance for IANA regarding the delegation and allocation of the IPv6 prefix designated for DRIP. He emphasized the distinction between reverse DNS resolution and prefix allocation.
- Jim noted that while RFCs indicate a chunk of space is set aside for DRIP, the "business relationship" side and clear rules for IANA on how to proceed with delegation remain ambiguous.
- A suggestion was made for Jim to summarize this issue in an email to the mailing list, with Eric Vyncke responding with potential action points.
- An in-person discussion at IETF 117 in San Francisco, including Bob Moskovitz, Jim Reid, Ken W. (if attending), Eric Vyncke, and possibly others, was suggested to align on this topic.
Working Group Future and Participation:
- Stu expressed disappointment regarding the low internal participation within the DRIP working group, which has primarily involved only the ADs, chairs, Stu, Bob, Jim, and Adam.
- Despite low internal participation, the work has gained significant external attention from organizations like ASTM (for their A2X – Aircraft Everything Communications initiative) and the FAA (US civil aviation authority). A recent demonstration saw 15 FAA staff attending, observing, and asking questions about the authentication capability added by DRIP, which is absent from baseline ASTM standards.
- Stu mentioned the initial vision for DRIP included two phases: first, making UAS Remote ID information trustworthy, and second, making that information useful (e.g., for Command and Control links). Bob Moskovitz has been independently developing drafts for these second-phase applications.
- Bob Moskovitz had requested the adoption of some of his independent drafts (including the DKI document, which has become a core component due to repeated restructuring of handler registries).
- The chairs (Med and Daniel) expressed a preference to defer the adoption of new documents until the core authentication and registry documents have been published as RFCs. They acknowledge the niche nature of DRIP and the need to help new industries engage with the IETF, but also emphasized the need for broader IETF participation beyond the current small group.
- Suggestions for increasing participation included publishing work in the Internet Journal, outreach in other venues, and exploring interfaces with work in 3GPP.
- Eric Vyncke highlighted that ICAO and ASTM are more formal, top-down organizations compared to the IETF's bottom-up approach, and emphasized that IETF interims are free and accessible.
- Adam Montville concurred with the chairs' preference to reassess before adopting more documents, though he noted the DKI document's growing "core" status implies it may need adoption or its content integrated into the registry document to complete the core set of DRIP documents.
- Stu reiterated the need for help in promoting DRIP work to the broader IETF community and, importantly, to external bodies like ICAO, ASTM, RTCA, and IEEE, and possibly the IETF security area, to attract more contributors.

Decisions and Action Items

Decision: Adam Montville volunteered to be the note taker for this meeting.
Decision: The chairs (Med and Daniel) expressed a preference to defer the adoption of new working group documents until the core authentication and registry documents have been published as RFCs.
Action Item: Eric Vyncke to follow up on getting the ICAO shop page functional.
Action Item: Eric Vyncke to send an email to IETF LLC requesting the purchase of four ICAO code points for DRIP.
Action Item: Adam Montville (as authentication draft editor) to integrate the newly acquired ICAO code points into the authentication draft, assigning their specific functions.
Action Item: Med (Daniel) to coordinate "fresh eyes" reviews (e.g., direct threat review requests from UPS) for the updated authentication draft.
Action Item: Med (Daniel) to aim for a new version of the registry draft by the end of the week.
Action Item: Adam Montville to reach out to Jim Reid via alternative means to help resolve his IETF mailing list email server issues.
Action Item: Jim Reid to send a summary email to the DRIP mailing list outlining the outstanding issues regarding IAB-level guidance for IANA on IPv6 prefix delegation/allocation. Eric Vyncke will reply to this.
Action Item: WG participants, including Jim Reid, Bob Moskovitz (if attending), Ken W., Eric Vyncke, Stu, Med, Daniel, and Adam Montville, to coordinate an in-person meeting at IETF 117 in San Francisco to discuss the IPv6 prefix delegation/allocation issues.
Action Item: WG participants (Stu, Med, Daniel, Adam, Jim, Eric) to actively promote DRIP work within and outside the IETF (e.g., Internet Journal, ICAO, ASTM, RTCA, IEEE, IETF Security Area) to attract new participants and contributors.

Next Steps

Complete the acquisition of ICAO code points and integrate them into the authentication draft.
Finalize and publish the authentication and registry drafts as RFCs.
Address the IAB-level guidance needed for IANA regarding IPv6 prefix delegation and allocation for DRIP.
Following the publication of core documents, reassess the working group's scope and consider the adoption of new work, such as the DKI document or integration of its content into existing drafts.
Continue efforts to increase DRIP working group participation and outreach to relevant external organizations.