**Session Date/Time:** 29 Mar 2023 00:30

# savnet

## Summary
The savnet working group met to discuss updates to the problem statement and requirements document for source address validation networks (SAVNET). The main focus was on addressing comments from previous discussions and progressing towards adoption of the document. Several presentations were given on architectural considerations and potential solutions, including intra-domain and inter-domain approaches. While some presentations were deemed out of scope for immediate adoption, they provided valuable insights for future work.

## Key Discussion Points
*   **Problem Statement and Requirements Updates:** Updates to the problem statement document (draft-ietf-savnet-problem-statement) were presented, addressing feedback on topics such as the boundary between intra-AS and inter-AS mechanisms, the inclusion of existing anti-spoofing technologies, and the removal of the "misaligned incentive" section.
*   **Real Forwarding Path Definition:**  A key point of discussion centered on the definition and feasibility of determining the "real forwarding path" for traffic, especially in scenarios involving multi-homing and asymmetric routing. The complexities of accurately identifying the actual path were highlighted.
*   **Intra-AS vs. Inter-AS Boundaries:** The boundary between intra-AS (within an Autonomous System) and inter-AS (between Autonomous Systems) anti-spoofing mechanisms was clarified, with the focus of the working group being on inter-AS collaboration.
*   **Architectural Considerations:** Several presentations explored architectural considerations for SAVNET, including the use of routing protocols as a distribution mechanism for information and the potential impact of incremental deployment. Concerns were raised about the security characteristics of information carried via routing protocols.
*   **Collaboration Messages & Potential Issues:** Discussion included collaborative messages to propagate forwarding path information and potential for improper blocking issues, and race conditions associated with the timing of control information versus data flow.
*   **Out-of-Scope Topics:** Discussion regarding the use of Blockchain and other technologies for BGP route validation were deemed outside the working group charter.

## Decisions and Action Items
*   Continue refining the problem statement and requirements document based on feedback received.
*   Focus on defining the "real forwarding path" concept and its limitations within the problem statement.
*   The chair called out the necessity of helping those taking the minutes, and asked for volunteers from the group.

## Next Steps
*   Continue discussion on the email list to address outstanding questions and comments.
*   Prioritize work on the problem statement and requirements document to achieve working group adoption.
*   Explore opportunities to integrate experience from the Bar (BGP Anti-Replay) working group with the emerging architectures.