Markdown Version | Session Recording

Session Date/Time: 09 Nov 2021 12:00

raw Session Minutes - IETF 112

Summary

The raw working group session at IETF 112 focused on the status of several key documents, including the architecture, technologies, use cases, and LDACS drafts. Key discussions revolved around the proposed splitting of the architecture and framework document, the proper referencing of work-in-progress and proprietary solutions in the technologies document, and the progress of LDACS through IESG review. The group also revisited its milestones, acknowledging delays and planning for more realistic timelines. Decisions were made to proceed with Working Group Last Calls (WGLC) for the technologies and use cases drafts and to establish informal interim meetings for focused work on the architecture document.

Key Discussion Points

• Logistics and Note-Taking: Chairs, Eve Schuler and Rick Taylor, welcomed attendees and reiterated IETF policies. An open call for minute-takers was made, noting the absence of regular minute-taker Ethan. The chairs committed to producing minutes from the recording.
• Document Status Overview:
  • draft-ietf-raw-ldacs: Currently in IESG review. Author Niels referred to requested edits as clarification/minor updates.
  • Working Group Documents: architecture, oam, technologies, and use cases are not yet ready for IESG review.
  • Industrial Requirements (draft-ietf-raw-industrial-requirements): Adopted after IETF 111 (previously a personal draft by Sophia Ruta), pending renaming. Discussion on potential content overlap with the use cases document.
  • Individual Drafts: Carlos Bernardos is still working on his MEC and joint selection drafts, not yet seeking WG adoption.
• Milestones Review:
  • Several milestones (use cases, technologies, industrial requirements, architecture, OAM, and gap analysis) are slipping.
  • The group acknowledged the need for more realistic milestone dates, particularly for documents without existing personal drafts or those with significant work remaining.
  • John Scudder (AD) agreed with the need to adjust dates.
• Architecture and Framework Draft (draft-ietf-raw-architecture-framework):
  • Proposal to Split: Pascal proposed splitting the document into "Architecture" (high-level design, earlier delivery) and "Framework" (detailed components, later delivery), arguing that a combined document is hard to finalize early.
  • Cross-Layer Optimization: Lou Berger emphasized the need to incorporate multi-layer optimization (e.g., as discussed in DetNet) and the use of DLAP, particularly for scenarios like DetNet over 5G. He offered to contribute to this effort.
  • Informal Meetings: Pascal suggested, and the chairs agreed, to set up informal, dedicated periodic meetings (e.g., bi-weekly) to accelerate progress on the architecture document, especially concerning cross-layer aspects.
  • Split Timing Debate: Abdul Salam suggested keeping the documents together for current review due to the current size and allowing for a later split. Janos agreed on initial bundling, questioning the order if split now. Pascal argued that a split would allow the "architecture" piece to progress faster, as the "framework" depends on future OAM details.
  • Terminology Clarification: Pascal discussed the distinction between "flow" (application-level) and "path"/"track"/"sub-track" (network-level for forwarding/processing), highlighting DetNet's use of path-level processing, and avoiding "path" due to existing IETF historical definitions.
• Technologies Draft (draft-ietf-raw-technologies):
  • Stability and Review: Pascal reported the document is stable, noting deep review by Rocco and Dave, with minor outstanding issues.
  • Referencing Standards in Progress: Janos raised concerns about referencing technologies from other SDOs (e.g., IEEE 802.11 DGB for Wi-Fi 7 features like TSN) that are not yet standardized, or proprietary solutions, as this can be speculative or unclear.
  • Compromise on Referencing: Rick suggested that the document can refer to ongoing work in other SDOs or even proprietary solutions to show community interest in solving certain problems, but must clearly qualify their maturity status (e.g., "work in progress," "proprietary," "not yet standardized"). Rocco reiterated concerns about proprietary solutions and some specific ongoing projects.
• IPv6 Options for DetNet (Individual Draft):
  • Pascal presented his individual contribution, IPv6 Options for DetNet and Raw.
  • The draft proposes using IPv6 extension headers (hop-by-hop and destination options with routing headers) to separate application flows from network operations, enabling multiple flows to share the same "pipe" (path).
  • It aims to enrich IPv6 DetNet capabilities to match or exceed MPLS-TP.
  • Key information fields include redundancy (sequence counters, network coding details), path option (for per-hop observation), and loose path option (for larger domains).
• Use Cases Draft (draft-ietf-raw-use-cases):
  • Carlos Bernardos provided an update, noting editorial fixes and the addition of content on "non-latency critical communications" for each use case.
  • One external review was received from Corina.
  • The authors believe the document has aligned with the industrial requirements document by cross-referencing for further detail.
• LDACS Draft (draft-ietf-raw-ldacs):
  • Niels reported on version 09, which incorporated feedback from the Routing Directorate and streamlined content.
  • A major update was the rework of the security section, including the addition of post-quantum security considerations.
  • Niels clarified LDACS's role as an access technology for the ICAO ATN/IPS, its characteristics (robustness, message prioritization), rollout plans (Europe first, then Asia/US), and detailed its security architecture (PKI, cell attachment, mutual authentication key establishment, user/control data protection, specific algorithms).
  • The document is still awaiting reviews from other IESG areas (e.g., Security, OPS, INT). John Scudder confirmed he would expedite these reviews.

Decisions and Action Items

• Architecture and Framework Draft:
  • Decision: The document will be logically structured (and eventually split) into an "Architecture" part and a "Framework" part.
  • Action: Pascal to explicitly delineate the Architecture and Framework sections in the next revision (e.g., with a clear section break) to facilitate focused review.
  • Action: Chairs to set up informal, bi-weekly (or similar cadence) meetings to work on the Architecture document, focusing on cross-layer optimization and integrating Lou's feedback.
  • Decision: Revised milestone for raw-architecture is May 2022 (for WGLC/IESG review readiness). A new milestone for raw-framework will be created for later (tentatively November 2022 or mid-2023, subject to further discussion).
• Technologies Draft:
  • Decision: Proceed to Working Group Last Call (WGLC).
  • Action: Chairs to issue a four-week WGLC after IETF 112.
  • Action: The WGLC announcement will explicitly request reviewers (especially those familiar with other SDOs like IEEE, 3GPP) to scrutinize references and ensure accurate portrayal of the maturity and status (standardized, work-in-progress, proprietary) of referenced technologies.
  • Action: Chairs to send personal emails to Rocco and Dave to specifically request their review of references during WGLC.
• Use Cases Draft:
  • Decision: Proceed to Working Group Last Call (WGLC).
  • Action: Chairs to issue a four-week WGLC after IETF 112, allowing time for external reviews and alignment with the Industrial Requirements document.
• LDACS Draft:
  • Action: Working group members are requested to re-read the latest version (09) to ensure they are happy with the changes made in response to IESG feedback.
• Milestones:
  • Action: Chairs to update the working group milestones on the data tracker with more realistic dates, based on discussions and feedback, particularly for the slipping documents.
• Meeting Minutes:
  • Action: Chairs to produce meeting minutes from the recording, potentially using YouTube's auto-transcription as a starting point.

Next Steps

• Informal Architecture Meetings: The chairs will schedule and announce the first of the dedicated informal meetings for the raw architecture document.
• Working Group Last Calls: WGLCs for the technologies and use cases drafts will be initiated shortly after IETF 112 concludes.
• IESG Reviews: Continue to monitor the IESG review process for the LDACS draft, with an expectation for further feedback from other IESG areas.
• IETF 113 Session: A raw session is planned for IETF 113, currently scheduled for Bangkok (though an in-person meeting location shift to the US or EU was hinted at during the plenary). The group looks forward to potentially meeting in person for the first time since its inception.