►
From YouTube: IETF 110 Plenary
Description
The plenary session at IETF 110 will be held at 1600 UTC on 10 March 2021. he IETF 110 Plenary provides the usual updates on various topics and the official transition of Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) members as described in RFC 8713.
A
All
right
welcome
everyone
to
the
ietf,
110
administrative
and
operations
plenary,
I'm
alyssa
cooper-
and
I
am
the
itf
chair
for
a
few
more
minutes,
hopefully
everyone's
having
a
good
meeting,
and
I
think
we
can
kick
off
next
slide.
Please.
A
If
you
are
speaking
in
the
turn
on
your
video
and
we
strongly
recommend
the
use
of
a
headset,
if
you
need
more
guidance,
there's
a
participant
guide
available
online
next
slide.
Please
here's
our
agenda
for
today.
After
this
welcome,
we
will
have
a
presentation
from
our
meeting
post,
google
and
then
we'll
have
brief
updates
from
a
variety
of
people
and
organizations
in
the
ietf
robert.
Do
you
have
a
question
I'll
see
you
in
the
queue.
A
Welcome
so
we'll
have
updates
from
myself
from
for
the
ietf
and
the
isg
from
the
iab,
the
irtf,
the
nomcom,
the
itf
llc
and
the
itf
trust
next.
A
C
A
Itf
llc
next,
please
so,
first
off
a
huge
thank
you
to
our
meeting
host
for
this
meeting.
Google,
even
though
we're
not
meeting
in
person,
these
meetings
still
require
a
lot
of
effort
in
the
background
and
the
support
of
sponsors
like
google
is
critical
to
being
able
to
deliver
the
meeting
experience
that
we
all
have.
So
we
are
deeply
thankful
to
google
for
their
continuing
support
and
I
think
we
have
a
video
to
queue
up.
A
D
Those
of
you
who've
been
participating
in
ietf.
Thank
you.
Those
of
you
who
are
interested
in
participating,
please
do
yeah,
you
can't
become
a
member.
All
you
can
do
is
show
up
and
share
your
ideas.
Why
is
that
important?
Well,
the
internet's
been
evolving
for
the
past
40
some
odd
years
and
to
first
order.
D
The
reason
it's
been
evolving
is
to
meet
new
demands
and
to
incorporate
new
ideas
coming
from
people
like
you
at
the
ietf,
and
so
let
me
encourage
you
to
continue
all
of
that
creative
work.
It's
a
huge
opportunity
to
keep
expanding
the
functionality
and
utility
of
the
internet
as
it
spreads
around
the.
D
A
Excellent
well,
that
was
very
inspiring
to
hear
from
vince.
So
thanks
again
to
google,
and
I
think
we
can
move.
A
On
also
wanted
to
say
a
huge
thank
you
to
everybody
who
has
worked
to
help,
make
this
meeting
happen
and
and
all
of
our
ietf
meetings,
and
that
includes
the
secretariat
meet
echo,
the
knock
team,
the
llc,
the
tools
team
and
all
those
who
are
supporting
the
hackathon
again,
the
the
meetings
couldn't
couldn't
happen,
if
not
for
the
efforts
of
a
large
number
of
people
who
put
in
their
time
to
make
sure
that
everything
gets
off
smoothly
and
we've
had
a
really
smooth
experience
this
time.
A
So
this
will
be
my
report
just
a
few
topics.
First,
we're
going
to
look
at
participant
statistics,
look
a
little
bit
at
the
impact
of
covet
19
on
activity
in
the
ietf
and
talk
about
planning
for
future
meetings.
So
we
go.
A
A
We
have
a
good
number
of
registrations
here,
north
of
1200,
and
we're
pretty
steady
on
the
fee
waiver
numbers
as
well,
a
lot
of
people
participating
in
the
hackathon
virtually
even
though
we
can't
get
together
in
person.
So
that's
that's
been
great,
and
these
are
especially
for
the
meeting
itself.
These
are
the
registration
numbers,
we'll
have
more
detailed
attendance
numbers
that
get
posted
after
the
meeting
is
over
once
we
can
identify
actual
attendance
through
the
whole
week.
A
You
can
see
here
also
the
country
breakdown,
so
we
have
a
fairly
typical
split
for
us,
but
if
we
go
to
the
next
slide,
we
can
look
at
this
in
more
detail
across
the
last
couple
of
years.
A
So
we
thought
we
were
inspired
by
some
folks
who
are
collaborating
during
the
hackathon
in
the
who
work
on
the
big
bang
project
and
nick
doty
in
particular,
who
produced
the
chart
that
you're
looking
at
here
so
big
thanks
to
nick.
So
what
we're
looking
at
is
the
regional
breakdown
proportional
breakdown
for
attendance.
At
the
lesson
of
in-person
meetings
that
we
had
104
105
106
and
the
three
virtual
meetings
that
we've
had
107
108
109
prior
to
this
one.
A
So
if
you
look
at
the
first
set
of
three
104
five
and
six,
these
show
a
fairly
typical
regional
variation
for
us.
When
we
meet
in
europe,
we
have
a
higher
participation
from
people
who
are
based
in
europe,
not
too
surprising
same
thing
for
north
america,
same
thing.
For
for
asia
and
the
swings
there
can
be
pretty
significant.
A
Some
you
know
something
between
10
and
20
swings
for
each
of
those
regions,
depending
on
where
we
locate
the
meetings,
as
we've
switched
to
virtual
it's
much
more
steady
and
caveat
here,
a
little
bit
that
ietf
107
was
not
exactly
the
same
format
as
108
or
109.
If
people
recall
it
was
a
much
shorter
day,
we
did
a
much
smaller
number
of
sessions,
so
the
data
might
not
be
directly
comparable,
but
nevertheless
we
thought
was
interesting
to
look
at.
A
So
if
you
look
here
at
107,
108
109,
you
can
see
that
the
the
proportions
are
much
more
stable
and
a
little
change
there
in
109.
But
some
something
more
in
like
a
few
percentage
points
of
swing
for
for
each
of
the
largest
regions
from
which
we
get
participation,
nothing
like
10
or
20.
A
So
that's,
I
think
interesting
also
because
we
have
been
rotating
the
time
zone
of
the
of
the
virtual
meetings,
but
that
doesn't
seem
to
affect
the
regional
distribution
of
the
participants
as
much
as
rotating
the
actual
physical
meeting
location.
And
then
the
last
thing
I'll
say
about
this
is
that
the
104
105
106
numbers-
these
are
just
the
in-person
attendees.
They
don't
include
the
remote
participants
that
might
be
interesting
to
look
at
as
well
and
and
see
what
the
differences
are.
A
All
of
this
data
is
actually
available
by
the
data
tracker
api,
so
people
who
are
interested
can
go,
take
a
look
at
that
or,
if
you're
generally
interested
in
doing
some
analysis
on
participation,
data
of
different
kinds,
not
just
meetings
but
also
mailing
list
analysis,
go.
Take
a
look
at
that
big
bang
project.
People
are
doing
some.
Some
really
interesting
work
there.
A
A
So
what
you're
looking
at
here
is
the
total
volume
of
email
messages
on
ietf
lists
and
we
have
a
four
year
comparison
from
2017
through
2020,
2020,
obviously
being
the
dominated
by
the
by
the
pandemic
year
and
so
for
email
traffic.
What
we
see
is
that
the
email
traffic
during
the
pandemic
last
year
was
roughly
in
line
with
what
it
has
been
in
previous
years,
a
little
bit
a
little
bit
higher,
but
you
know
similar
to
what
we've
had
in
past
years,
we'll
go
to
the
next
slide.
Please.
A
Well,
if
we
look
at
zero
zero
drafts
published
here's
where
we
start
to
see
a
difference
so
from
2019
to
2020,
there's
about
a
16
drop
in
the
total
number
of
zero
zero
drafts
published,
which
might
tell
us
a
little
bit
about
you
know
new
work
coming
into
the
ietf
and
the
rate
at
which
you
know
people
are
coming
up
with
new
ideas
and
thinking
that
it's
a
good
time
to
you
know,
publish
a
zero
zero
draft.
A
I
think
a
lot
of
people
anecdotally,
who
who
do
work
in
the
itf,
have
have
had
this
feeling
that
it's
harder
to
get
new
work
going
without
the
hallway
conversations
and
the
face-to-face
interaction,
and
I
think
this
this
particular
number
illustrates
that
fairly.
Well,
there's
a
few
things
I'll
say
about
that.
One!
Is
that
there's
lots
of
other
ways
that
you
can
attempt
to
measure?
A
You
know
the
impact
of
covid
on
participation
and
the
iesg
is
very
interested
in
people's
ideas
about
that.
We
also
had
a
little
bit
of
discussion
about
the
rfc
publication
rate,
and
you
know
the
rate
of
documents
coming
into
isg
review.
Those
are
more
like
trailing
indicators.
This
is
more
like
a
leading
indicator,
but
it
might
be
interesting
to
look
at
trailing
ones
as
well,
and
we're
also
really
interested
in
people's
thoughts
and
ideas
about
how
we
can
try
to
make
up
the
difference
when
we
can't
meet
in
person.
A
So
if
people
have
good
ideas,
for
you
know
how
we
can
sort
of
re-stimulate
on
some
of
this
new
work
activity
or
whether
you
you
know
even
think
that
this
this
isn't,
you
know
cash
accurately
capturing
a
trend
of
of
it
being
more
difficult
to
start
new
work.
That
would
be
we're
super
interested
in
people's
ideas.
For
that.
So,
please,
you
know
come
to
the
mic
at
open
mic
or
you
can
reach
us
at
our
email
address
isg
ietf.org
next
slide.
Please.
A
So
planning
for
future
meetings,
people
may
have
seen
that
the
decision
process
for
whether
itf-111
will
run
in
person
or
not
began
with
community
consultation.
Last
week
it
may
have
been
the
week
before.
Actually
when
I'm
not
sure
it
was
last
week
when
we
wrote
the
slides
or
actually
was
last
week,
but
feedback
is
welcome
on
the
mini
couch's
mailing
list.
There
is
like
a
very
structured
and
detailed
process
that
we've
followed
in
the
past
few
rounds
for
making
the
decision
about
whether
to
move
forward
with
an.
A
A
A
That
is
the
one
unified
ticket
queue
for
all
ietf
support
requests
now,
so
you
know,
please
avail
yourself
of
that
if
you're
having
any
trouble
during
the
meeting,
if
you
have
feature
requests
for
meet
echo
or
for
other
itf
related
tools,
you
can
send
those
to
tools
discuss
and
they
will
be
triaged
there.
As
always,
there
will
be
a
meeting
survey
that
comes
out
at
the
end
of
this
meeting.
A
So
if
you
want
your
input
to
be
incorporated
into
future
meeting
planning,
then
please
fill
out
the
survey
when
it
gets
sent
around
and
then
for
a
bit
longer
term
meeting
planning.
We
still
have
the
stay
home
meet
only
online
working
group,
the
schmoo
group
it
met
yesterday
and
there's
a
bunch
of
different
topics
within
scope
for
that
charter.
There's
discussion
about
meeting
fees
for
online
meetings,
acer,
asynchronous
meetings,
potential
future
discussion
about
the
overall
meeting,
cadence
and
length
what
to
do
with
the
hackathon
when
it
when
we're
all
remote
considerations
for
cancellation.
A
A
We
also
have
a
bunch
of
other
information
covered
online.
We
didn't
have
any
appeals
this
time,
so
we
don't
have
anything
covered
there,
but
reports
from
the
iab,
the
llc
board,
the
secretariat
and
iana
are,
will
are
already
or
will
be
available
in
the
data
tracker
and.
A
C
Yeah,
hello,
everybody
from
my
site,
so
I
only
have
a
very
short
brief
update.
I
only
have
two
slides
and
we
can
move
directly
to
the
next
slide
and
one
more
actually.
This
is
only
like
the
cover
slide.
C
So,
as
always,
and
as
elisa
just
said,
we
have
uploaded
a
report
to
the
community,
which
is
part
of
the
proceedings,
and
you
can
find
all
the
boring
administrative
details
in
the
report
there
and
we
have
another
meeting
tomorrow,
which
is
the
iab
open
meeting.
C
We
do
this
for
a
couple
of
of
itf
meetings
now,
and
we
take
this
as
an
opportunity
to
have
more
technical
discussions
with
the
community
to
tell
the
community
what
we're
doing
with
respect
to
documents,
workshops
and
and
programs,
and
also
to
get
input
from
the
community.
That
session
will
happen
tomorrow
afternoon,
and
so
I
hope
to
see
you
all
there
and
have
some
more
discussions
there.
If
you
have
any
questions
about
the
report,
just
send
an
email
to
iab
or
to
me
directly.
C
So
next
slide
is
already
my
my
last
slide
and
it's
just
a
couple
of
quick
announcements.
I
want
to
make
so
first
of
all,
the
ib
has
reselected
me
as
the
iap
chair
thanks
very
much,
I'm
very
happy
that
I
can
surf
in
this
position
for
another
year,
and
this
is
also
mentioned
in
the
report,
and
we
have
some
more
appointments.
We
made
between
the
last
meeting
in
this
meeting.
One
is
that
we
also
reappointed
already
a
couple
weeks
or
actually
months
ago,
colin
perkins.
As
the
irtf
chair.
C
We
got
a
lot
of
good
feedback
about
him,
so
there
was
like
no
other
choice
and
warren
kumari
is
appointed
for
the
icon
technical
esl
group,
but
I
also
want
to
take
the
opportunity
here
to
reserve
to
really
thank
everybody
else
who
is
serving
as
an
appointment,
an
important
position
and
serving
the
community
here,
we're
currently
in
the
appointment
process
for
the
internet
society
board
of
trustees.
C
So
we
basically
the
iab,
already
selected
the
two
positions,
it's
now
for
confirmation
with
the
iesg,
but
it
will
only
be
announced
later
in
may,
because
we
coordinate
this
with
ice
hock
and
then
one
last
announcement.
We
have
created
a
new
position,
which
is
called
the
iab
liaison
coordinator
position,
and
we
have
created
a
new
male,
alias
that
you
can
use
to
post
any
kind
of
info
questions
or
information
about
liaisons
to
us.
C
So
you
will
hear
more
about
this
in
future
and
this
first
step
this
first
new
position
is
really
to
get
everybody
the
community,
as
well
as
the
liaison
managers,
a
clear
contact
point,
because
that
has
been
missed
in
the
part
in
the
past,
but
more
information
about
this
will
follow
in
the
next
couple
of
weeks.
This
is
an
ongoing
process,
ongoing
discussions
and
we
will
also
update
you
a
little
bit
more
on
this.
C
C
F
F
Okay,
thank
you.
Maria
next
slide,
please,
okay,
so
my
name
is
colin
perkins,
I'm
the
irtf
chair
and
I
I'd
like
to
to
echo
mary's
thanks
and
thank
you
for
again
for
the
reappointment
and
I'm
looking
forward
to
continuing
to
to
work
with
the
community
for
the
next
couple
of
years
in
the
irtf
next
slide,
please!
F
So,
as
I'm
sure
most
of
you
know,
the
irtf
is
a
parallel
organization
to
the
ietf
that
works
to
encourage
collaboration
between
the
research
community
and
the
standards
community.
It's
organized
there's
a
set
of
research
groups
and
those
of
the
groups
which
are
highlighted
in
dark
blue
on
this
slide
are
yet
to
meet
so
look
out
for
them
later
this
week
and
we
just
had
a
really
interesting
session
from
that
from
the
quantum
internet
group.
So
I
think
some
some
really
nice
research
happening
here.
F
If
you
want
to
learn
more
about
how
the
the
irtf
works.
Rfc
7418
is
a
really
nice
primer
for
a
etf
participants
to
introduce
the
way
that
the
research,
the
research
groups
work
next
slide.
Please.
F
In
addition
to
the
research
groups,
we
also
run
the
applied
networking
research
prize
in
cooperation
with
with
the
internet
society
and
with
sponsorship
from
comcast
and
nbc
universal,
and
the
applied
networking
research
prize
is
awarded
to
recognize
some
of
the
best
recent
results
in
applied
networking
to
recognize
interesting,
new
research
ideas
which
are
of
potential
relevance
to
the
standards
community
and
to
recognize
and
support
upcoming
people
that
are
likely
to
have
an
impact
on
internet
standards
and
technologies.
F
Who
would
not
otherwise
participate
in
in
the
ietf
in
the
standards
community
and
try
and
bring
them
into
the
community
and
encourage
collaboration
and
discussion
next
slide?
Please?
F
So
we
we
had
two
of
these
prize-winning
talks
earlier
in
this
week,
francis
yan
from
microsoft.
Research
formerly
from
stanford
university,
gave
a
talk
on
his
work
on
applying
machine
learning
to
to
video
bitrate
adaptation
and
audrey
randall
from
ucsd
gave
a
talk
on
dns,
caching
and
privacy,
and
these
were
two
really
really
excellent,
really
really
interesting
price
winning
talks.
F
F
And
the
other
thing
we
do
in
the
irtf
is
we
organize
the
applied
networking
research
workshop
in
cooperation
with
acm
sitcom
and
the
applied
networking
research
workshop?
Is
a
forum
to
try
and
bring
the
research
community,
the
vendors,
the
operators
and
the
standards
community
together
to
present
and
discuss
emerging
results
in
applied
networking
research.
F
I'm
pleased
to
announce
that
the
the
workshop
will
be
going
ahead
this
year,
co-located
with
itf
111
in
july,
the
program
committee
chairs,
andrew
lutu
and
nick
femster
and
the
the
call
for
papers
for
this
should
be
out
later
this
week
and
the
paper
submission
deadline
will
be
the
21st
of
april.
So
if
you
have
any
interesting
applied
networking
research,
please
do
consider
submitting
it
to
the
workshop
and
if,
if
you
don't
have
any
any
such
work,
then
please
do
consider
attending
and
that's
all
I
have
so.
G
And
next
slide,
thank
you.
My
term
is
done.
I
am
now
going
to
be.
You
know
unless
something
happens,
and
somebody
needs
a
sudden
nomination,
I'll
be
looking
forward
to
whoever
andrew
manages
to
rope
into
becoming
the
next
nomcom
chair
for
2021,
but
I
just
have
to
say
you
know
it
was.
It
really
actually
was
a
pretty
easy
experience
and
I
just
don't
know
what
problem
all
of
y'all
have
in
not
just
volunteering
in
maths
and
reaching
out
to
andrew,
but
anyway
it
was
a
good
experience.
G
The
voting
members
were
wonderful.
The
liaisons
were
wonderful.
The
interviews
using
calendly
to
set
them
up
turned
out
to
be
pretty
easy.
The
ietf
provided
webex
worked
great.
The
nominees
were
wonderful
and
followed
instructions,
so
it
was
time
consuming,
but
you
know
if
anybody's
thinking
about
it,
you
know,
as
I
know,
andrew's
looking
for
people.
G
I
will
be
there
to
help
the
next
nom-com
chair,
and
so
I
certainly
hope
we
get
a
great
new
nom-com
chair
and
I
really
do
think
it
was
a
great
experience
now
moving
right
along.
I
was
asked
to
provide
a
bit
of
info
on
some
takeaways
next
slide.
Please
and.
G
Right
so,
oh
sorry,
first
yeah!
No!
This
is
the
next
slide.
Just
you
know,
if
you're
wondering
about
what
I
think
the
required
skills
were
that
got
me
through
this
past
year
of
nom-com.
This
is
the
list,
and
you
know
I.
I
know
that
the
rfc
actually
said
that
somebody
needed
to
have
a
good
sense
of
process,
but
trust
me.
There
are
so
many
people
helpful
people
on
the
ietf
email
list
who
are
just
perfectly
willing
to
help
you
out
with
process
that
that
really
doesn't
need
to
be
the
strong
suit.
G
It
certainly
wasn't
mine,
okay,
so
next
slide.
G
These
are
some
of
the
takeaways,
and
this
was
something
that
actually
was
probably
for
me,
the
most
stressful
part
of
the
entire
hong
kong
process
was
the
considerable
disconnect
between
what
the
ietf
community
thought
it
wanted
from
an
llc
board
member
and
what
the
posted
expectations
and
desired
expertise
were,
and
also
what
the
rfc
defining
the
llc
said.
That
was
needed.
So
this
is,
you
know
something
that
the
community
may
want
to
think
about,
because
there
is
the
rfc.
G
8711
does
say
that
it
should
be
revisited
about
three
years
after
formation.
You'll
need
to
consider
giving
input,
and
also
I
did
communicate
to
the
llc
that
there
was
this
disconnect.
G
I
think
it
reconnected
okay,
so
I
was
saying
that
you
know.
I
do
think
that
the
llc
is
working
on
getting
better
communication.
I
know
I've
noticed
a
lot
more
from
jay.
I've
noticed
a
lot
more
from
jason.
I've
noticed
people,
you
know,
are
being
invited
to
the
open
part
of
the
llc
board
meetings,
and
so,
if
you
feel
that
there's
this
disconnect,
I
strongly
encourage
people
to
take
advantage
of
these
opportunities
that
are
being
presented
to
all
of
us
in
order
to
take
your
step
in
being
better
connected
next.
G
Slide
just
some
others.
Some
people
in
the
community
thought
it
might
be
useful
if
they
had
some
more
information
on
what
people
wanted
to
accomplish
as
part
of
being
a
candidate
for
a
particular
position.
So
just
some
things
to
consider
you
know
if
anybody
wants
to
create
a
new
rfc
or
organizer.
I
don't
know
what
process
is
not
my
strong
suit,
but
you
know
maybe
consider
the
the
existence
of
a
pro
public
profile
with
a
statement
for
nominees
and
maybe
their
picture
right.
G
There
consider
a
town
hall
discussion
for
ietf
chair,
which
of
course,
won't
be
happening
for
this
year,
where
maybe
people
can
get
a
better
sense
of
the
candidates,
because,
while
you
know
to
be
widely
known
within
ietf
probably
means
you're
only
known
to
about
half
of
the
people
in
ietf
and
other
people
might
have
opinions
on
what
you'd
like
to
accomplish
but
may
not
have
opinions
on
who
you
are
because
they
don't
know
you
another
comment,
and
this
came
from
some
of
the
people
who
are
not
employed
by
big
vendors
and
are
individual
contractors
and
such
and
need
to
get
funding
for
support.
G
There
was
a
sense
that
maybe,
if
there's
anything,
we
can
do
to
shorten
the
duration
of
time
between
putting
your
name
in
the
hat
and
getting
the
decision.
That
would
be
helpful
again.
This
would
be
something
you
know,
process
people
might
need
to
look
at
and
then
you
know
just
another
takeaway
and
I
gave
this
one
at
the
last
session
is
you
know
you
saw
the
statistics
from
alyssa
as
to
who's
participating
and
in
none
of
those
charts.
G
Did
north
america
get
over
60
percent
from
what
I
saw
and
it
tended
to
be
trending
around
50
percent,
and
yet
65
percent
of
the
nominee
pool
seem
to
be
coming
from
north
america.
So
I
think
this
is
something
we
can
improve
on,
and
you
know
I'm
really
intrigued
by
the
work
that
keith
and
fernando
are
doing
to
try
to
document
some
of
the
additional
ways
to
improve
diversity
that
they're
putting
a
draft
in
gen
dispatch,
and
things
like
that.
G
G
Slide,
okay
nominees
did
like
the
flexible
interview
schedule.
You
know
I
had
times
pretty
much
all
across
the
day.
There
was
a
six
hour
time
slot
during
the
a
lot
of
people's
middle
of
the
night
that
we
didn't
have
any,
but
in
general
it
seemed
to
work
really
well
that
there
was
an
interesting
concept
that
incumbency
nomcom
feedback
is
the
only
way
they
can
get
feedback
on
how
they're
doing
their
job.
So
you
know
it
may
be
useful
if
we
considered
other
mechanisms
for
providing
current
leadership
with
feedback.
G
It
shouldn't
be
too
hard
to
do.
I
think
it
should.
Probably
you
know.
Feedback
should
be
separated
from
mom
com.
Nom-Com
really
is
not
the
best
way
for
feedback
to
happen.
There
was
a
request
to
coordinate
candidate
announcements
with
press
release
and
public
relations,
and
so
maybe
you
know
bring
in
somebody
like
greg
wood
before
the
announcement
goes
out
so
that
he
could
have
things
ready
from
a
pr
perspective
before
the
announcements
that
get
get
shipped
and
I'll
certainly
work
with
the
next
numcom
chair
on
that.
G
If,
maybe,
if
that's
okay
with
you
know,
maybe
we
need
a
discussion
on
the
process
of
whether
that's
acceptable,
and
then
you
know
one
thing
I'd
like
to
get
help
from
that
would
be
really
good
from
a
tools
perspective
is
we've
got
to
get
rid
of
the
77
column,
pre-wrapped
ascii,
for
providing
questionnaire
responses,
and
it
would
be
really
nice
if
we
had
a
web
form-
and
you
know
a
major
takeaway
is
yes,
numcom
can
be
done
remotely.
G
I
think
it
clearly,
it
can
be
done
100
remotely,
and
I
also
think
that
it
can
be
done
remotely
by
just
a
portion
of
the
members
and
nominees,
and
so
there
should
not
be
any
expectation
or
requirement
that
you
know
going
forward
even
that
non-pom
members
or
nominees
have
to
be
present
for
interviews
for
meetings
for
any
of
that
they
we
need
to
be
able
to
support
all
of
this
remotely
going
forward,
even
once
we
get
to
meet
in
person
again.
G
Okay,
I
think,
let's
see
next
slide,
and
I
do
have
some
things
that
I
needed
to
mention
that
I
didn't
put
on
a
slide.
So
I
forgot
to
put
a
slide
together
about
the
community
feedback
questions.
So
I'm
just
going
to
run
through
those
really
quick.
G
There
was
a
question
about
iesg
expectations
of
proposed
standard,
so
they
were
unhappy
people
and
they
were
satisfied
people
and
there
was
no
consensus
on
this
and
it
to
me,
and
it
seemed
that
the
unhappiness
was
mostly
impacted
by
personal
experience,
with
specific
drafts
rather
than
general
trends.
Really
because
we
don't
have
statistics
on
general
trends
iesg
as
servants
of
the
community,
motherhood
and
apple
pie.
G
Absolutely
it
was
agreed
that
this
was
generally
how
it
should
be,
but
there
was
some
pushback
that
one
job
of
the
steering
committee
is
to
steer
with
that
said,
there
were
views
from
some
people
that
they
actually
think
the
various.
G
I
groups
are
doing
a
good
job
with
this
and
there
are
some
people
who
felt
there
did
not,
and
so
I
could
not
say
that
there
was
any
consensus
as
to
the
current
state
of
affairs
as
to
whether
people
are
living
up
to
the
expectation
of
iesg
and
others
as
servants
of
the
community
and
again
the
view
seemed
impacted
by
specific
personal
experiences
and
how
people
perceive
things
you
know:
glasses,
half,
full
or
empty,
or
things
like
that,
engaging
with
external
impacted
stakeholders
in
general.
G
There
does
seem
to
be
a
belief
that
the
ietf
cannot
exist
in
a
vacuum
and
needs
to
engage
with
open
source
community
opera
community,
with
operators
with
other
sdos
and
with
others
in
order
to
remain
relevant
and
to
avoid
having
our
efforts
driven
to
other
organizations.
This
opinion
was
not
universal,
some
perceived
ietf
to
be
in
a
position
of
strength
where
it
could
dictate
how
things
happen
in
the
world.
G
But
I
would
say
that
the
consensus
view
was
one
of
engagement
and
humility,
recycling,
leadership
and
returning
incumbents,
and
this
was
not
a
direct
question
to
the
community,
but
it
did
get
discussed
post
announcement
of
the
candidates
and
it
was
certainly
considered
in
a
lot
of
the
feedback
on
specific
candidates
or
specific
nominees
in
I
would
have
to
say
there
is
strong
consensus
that
people
who
have
a
single
term
under
their
belt
and
are
doing
a
good
job
should
be
given
a
second
term.
G
G
Now,
with
that
said,
I
did
notice
a
strong
trend
that
once
former
leaders
are
out
of
leadership
for
multiple
years,
maybe
four
or
five,
certainly
more
than
five
years,
there
seems
to
be
a
significant
number
of
people
who
prefer
not
to
put
them
back
in
not
as
a.d
iab
was
a
little
less
clear,
but
even
there
there
was
a
strong.
You
know
this
person's
already
been
there
done,
that
we'd
like
to
see
new
people,
and
that
doesn't
mean
that
people
who
have
been
leadership
in
the
past
shouldn't
try.
G
There
is
a
strong
sense
that
iab
seems
to
be
a
place
where
ads
go
to
retire,
but
even
there
you
know,
there's
a
difference
between
if
you're,
a
recent
ad
or
current
a
d
who's
stepping
out
of
an
a
d
position,
there's
a
lot
of
support
for
those
people,
and
so
there
wasn't
a
push
to
not
do
that
in
the
iab.
G
But
you
know
again
the
the
recent
people
there.
The
feedback
that
I
saw
was
different
from
what
I
saw
for
feedback
who
of
people
who
had
been
80s
a
lot
while
previously,
and
that
simply
is
what
it
is,
and
I
can't
speak
to
necessarily
why
that
is.
But
I
did
see
a
lot
of
that,
and
so
you
know
I
hope
the
next
mom
com
chair
has
as
good
luck
as
I
did
and
you
all
have
fun.
It's
not
my
job
anymore.
G
H
Yeah,
I'm
greg
wood
director
of
communications
and
operations
for
the
itf
administration,
llc,
I'm
standing
in
today
for
jay,
who
is
the
executive
director
of
the
itf
executive
director
and
is
unable
to
be
here
it's
great
to
see
so
many
of
you
here
and
it's
been
great
to
see
people
in
gathering
in
sessions
over
the
last
three
days
next
slide.
Please.
H
As
this
meeting
has
been
going
on
and
in
past
meetings
that,
as
ellis
noted,
they
depend
really
on
the
sponsors
and
hosts
of
the
meeting,
so
we're
very
thankful
to
google
for
hosting
itf-110
and
especially
that
they
have
continued
to
recognize
that
there's
value
to
meeting
as
the
meetings
have
moved
online.
So
meetings
rely
crucially
on
a
supportive
host.
So
thank
you
very
much
again
to
google
for
hosting
itf
110
next
slide.
H
Please,
you
may
have
seen
the
announcement
that
we've
restructured
the
itf
sponsorship
program
and
the
aim
of
that
is
to
align
the
opportunities
and
benefits
of
sponsoring
the
ietf
so
that
they're
more
appealing
to
current
and
potential
sponsors
they're
easier
to
administer
and
they
provide
greater
certainty
for
both
the
itf
and
sponsor
organizations.
So
more
more
details
available
on
the
idea
of
website
and
jay
also
had
a
recent
blog
post
that
talks
about
this.
So
I
first
want
to
say
thank
you
to
the
amazing
equipment
and
services
sponsors,
cisco,
juniper
and
webex.
H
They
make
super
important
contributions
that
make
this
meeting
and
other
events
and
on
the
ongoing
operations
of
the
ietf
possible.
So
thank
you
to
our
equipment
and
services.
Sponsors
next
slide.
Please.
H
Thanks
to
comcast
and
icann
for
being
among
the
first
sponsors
to
be
recognized
under
several
new
categories
of
the
sponsorship
program,
with
the
diversity
inclusivity,
sponsor
comcast
and
icann
and
the
running
code
sponsorships
of
things
like
the
hackathon.
So
thank
you
to
ikan
for
that
next
slide,
please
beyond
sponsors,
ietf
meetings
and
work
generally
just
would
not
be
possible
without
thousands
of
hours
really
contributed
by
dozens
of
volunteers,
and
you
see
these
listed
here-
the
individuals
listed
here,
so
I
want
to
thank
them.
H
The
code
sprint
adjacent
to
this
meeting
took
place
a
couple
weeks
ago
and
the
participants
there
as
usual
helped
improve
the
tools
that
we
all
use
to
work
online
with
each
other.
The
network
operations
center
has
been
working
for
weeks
to
ensure
that
the
services
and
infrastructure
that
this
meeting
depends
on
and
other
events
like
the
hackathon
have
worked
smoothly.
H
A
sincere
thanks
again
to
the
volunteers
and
thanks
also
to
their
employer,
employers
and
and
organizations
for
making
it
possible
for
these
volunteers
to
get
dedicate
their
time
to
this
work.
Thank
you
next
slide,
please
beyond
volunteers
and
there's
an
extremely
hard-working,
broader
team
that
are
really
committed
to
making
itf
meetings
work
and
that's
whether
they're
in
person
or
online,
and
really
no
matter
the
circumstances.
H
A
quick
side
note
as
I
was.
I
just
noticed
a
few
days
ago
that
the
first
message
to
the
many
couches
emailed
us
that
alyssa
mentioned
earlier
actually
happened
about
five
years
ago
around
this
time,
and
the
first
message
is
included
questions
about
whether
or
not
it
would
be
possible
to
hold
meetings
with
people
on
the
order
on
the
order
of
a
thousand
people,
all
everybody
from
home.
Would
that
even
be
possible
and
what
are
the
issues
that
we'd
run
into?
H
So
I
think
that
we've
encountered
a
lot
of
those
issues
and
some
others,
as
we've
gotten
ready
for
this
and
made
this
meeting
and
previous
meetings
happen.
So
this
team,
along
with
other
members
of
the
iit
community,
have
found
a
way
to
make
these
meetings
work.
So
thank
you
to
them
slide,
please.
H
I
know
many
of
us
are
already
looking
ahead,
even
if
we're
in
the
middle
of
itf
110
we're
looking
ahead
to
iatf
111
and
we're
grateful
to
juniper
networks
for
hosting
that
that
upcoming
meeting
and
as
noted
on,
the
admin
discuss,
email
list,
there's
a
consultation
and
evaluation
about
the
location
and
other
aspects
of
that
meeting
and
the
process
around
that
and
feedback
is
requested
by
april
2nd.
So
I
encourage
you
to
take
a
look
at
that
and
provide
your
feedback.
If
you
have
thoughts
next
slide,
please.
H
And
juniper,
of
course,
is
an
itf
global
host
who,
along
with
cisco
and
comcast
ericsson
and
huawei,
nbc,
universal
and
nokia,.
H
They
reflect
the
highest
level
of
commitment,
among
all
t,
all
all
ietf
sponsors,
so
as
global
hosts,
it's
really
the
sustaining
partnerships
that
ensure
the
continuity
of
ietf
meetings.
So
thank
you
to
all
of
our
global
hosts
next
slide,
please.
H
This
is
just
a
quick
rundown
of
the
upcoming
ietf
meeting
schedule
and
plans.
If
you
or
your
organization
are
interested
in
sponsoring
an
iq
upcoming
itf
meeting,
I
encourage
you
to
contact
the
sponsorship
team
at
the
email
address.
You
see
there
next
slide.
Please.
H
And
here's
a
very
high
level
recap
of
participation
numbers
from
this
meeting.
The
important
point
I
think
from
the
itf
lc
point
of
view,
is
that
you
can
see
that
we've
exceeded
the
plans
or
the
expectations
for
and
and
the
budget
for
participants
at
this
meeting,
so
we're
in
good
shape
there
next
slide.
Please.
H
And
finally,
here's
a
reminder
of
what
jay
and
I
look
like
when
we
are
well
lit
and
photographed,
and
also
just
a
reminder
that
we
are
currently
in
the
process
of
engaging
a
full-time
fundraiser
who
will
be
focused
largely
on
the
opportunity
presented
by
the
itf
endowment.
H
We
also
just
posted
a
position
for
the
senior
software
development
engineer
and
we're
actively
seeking
candidates
for
that
so
feel
free
to
point
candidates,
you
think,
might
be
good
fits
in
our
direction
and
there
are
details
posted
online,
but
you
can
also
just
drop
me
an
email
and
we'll
get
them
headed
in
the
right
direction.
I
Great,
thank
you
very
much
greg.
I
appreciate
it.
My
name
is
jason,
livinggood
and
I'll
be
giving
the
llc
board
update.
If
you
can,
please
go
to
the
next
slide.
I
So
this
is
our
current
list
of
board
members,
you'll
notice,
of
course,
that
lars
is
the
new
person
on
the
board
as
a
result
of
his
new
position.
So
we're
welcoming
him
to
the
board.
He's
joined
our
official
lists
as
of
today,
and
we've
been
working
the
past
few
weeks
to
onboard
him
and
prepare
him
for
everything
related
to
the
board
next
slide.
I
I
All
right,
hopefully,
I'm
back
at
the
beginning
of
the
iasa
2
process.
Alyssa
was
really
part
of
helping
organize
the
ietf,
helping
create
a
working
group
and
try
to
achieve
some
consensus
in
the
organization
of
the
itf
about
where
we
needed
to
go
and
then
was
able
to
get
the
lc
formed
and
cooperation
and
partnership
with
isoc
and
then
able
to
serve
on
the
initial
interim
board
and
then,
of
course,
the
first
full
board.
I
I
All
right
so
upcoming
board
meetings.
We
do
have
a
board
meeting
later
this
week
on
the
11th,
which
I
think
is
actually
tomorrow
so
you're
you're.
Welcome
to
that,
you
can
find
the
links
at
the
bottom
that
get
you
the
webex
information
as
well
as
the
agenda.
I'll,
also
note
that
at
this
meeting
tomorrow
we
are
finalizing
the
agenda
for
our
strategic
retreat,
which
will
take
place
the
24th
and
25th
of
march.
That
will
also
be
largely
open.
I
I
So
some
current
work,
we
obviously
concluded
the
community
survey.
That
was
one
of
the
recommendations
that
came
out
of
the
nom-com
and
we
implemented
that
in
december,
and
I
think,
had
feedback
open
on
the
survey
through
january
to
allow
people
to
comment
through
the
holidays,
and
we
circulated
results
posted
a
blog
about
that.
I
think
the
only
comment
I
would
have
there
is.
I
It
would
be
great
to
have
more
respondents
next
year
when
we
do
it
number
two
we're
finishing
up
a
sort
of
the
preparation
of
the
fiscal
year
financials
and
completion
of
an
independent
audit.
As
we
did
last
year,
I
already
noted
the
strategic
retreat.
I
I
So
that
brings
us
to
item
4
here,
as
I
mentioned,
fundraising,
we're
very
close
to
having
that
fundraiser
on
board
jay's
working
on
that
diligently,
the
iosa
2
retrospective.
I
mentioned
that
in
our
retreat.
That's
where
we'll
be
really
digging
into
that
for
the
first
time
this
was
required.
It
was
put
into
the
the
rfcs
and
bcps
when
we
kicked
off
the
iasa
2
or
approved
the
iso2
structure
that
we
would
conduct
a
retrospective
to
see
if
there
were
any
gaps
in
the
iasa
2
structure.
I
I
So
these
are
the
the
latest
financials
based
on
december
balances.
The
only
two
notes
here
is
the
some
of
the
net
income
differences
and
we'll
have
more
information
about
this
one
the
financials
are
are
shared.
This
is
largely
due
to
when
we
are
recognizing
the
revenue
from
the
internet
society,
and
so
we
had
a
certain
amount
of
revenue
that
was
forecast
for
this
year,
based
on
prior
process.
I
However,
based
on
the
new
deal
with
the
internet
society,
those
funds
are
actually
coming
in
the
first
quarter
of
this
fiscal
year
and
there'll
be
more
phones,
of
course,
so
that
will
explain
some
of
those
differences,
we'll
explain
them
in
the
notes
when
the
fiscal
year
is
closed
and
then
on
investments.
You
know.
The
only
thing
I
will
note
here
is
don't
expect
returns
like
that
in
any
other
year
we
really
lucked
out.
In
a
way
I
mean
it
was
really
the
result
of
good
planning,
but
some
of
it
was
luck.
I
I
J
Hello
there
I'm
glenn
dean
and
I'm
going
to
give
the
presentation
update
on
the
ietf
trust
activities
next
slide.
Please.
J
Next
slide,
please,
so
the
ihf
trust
is
made
up
of
five
members.
I'm
the
chair,
kathleen
moriarty
is
our
treasurer.
The
other
trustees
are
joel.
Halpern,
john
levine
and
stephen
wenger.
J
J
So
a
lot
of
people
don't
really
hear
much
about
the
itf
trust
and
we're
probably
the
most
misunderstood
part
of
the
itf
simply
put
the
purpose
of
the
itf
trust
and
the
reason
it
was
created
was
to
manage
the
ip
assets
for
the
ietf,
with
the
goal
of
making
them
easy
to
use
and
available
to
use,
but
while
protecting
the
ownership
of
those
assets
so
that
the
ietf
retains
control
and
and
is
able
to
do
with
its
assets,
what
it
wants
to
do
with
one
ex.
J
We
focus
on
the
if
one
extension
was
done
in
2016
as
part
of
the
nti
ayana
transition,
there's
some
material
from
the
iana
that
also
came
into
the
trust
care
such
as
iana.org
the
domain
registration
and
things
like
that,
and
so
we
serve
both
the
itf
and
the
broader
community.
J
So
if
you
ever
wonder
who
owns
the
domains
like
itf.org
and
all
the
other
kind
of
stuff
and
who
takes
care
of
the
registrations?
Well,
that's
one
of
the
things
we
do.
We
also
manage
the
copyrights,
logos,
photos,
things
like
that
trademarks
as
well
as
software.
So
when
tools
and
rfc
tools
and
things
like
the
yang
catalog
are
published,
we
worry
about
the
licenses
there
and
make
sure
that
everything's
kept
in
order.
One
thing
we
don't
do
by
the
way
is
we
don't
do
patents,
so
we
do
ip,
but
not
patents.
J
So
the
trust
is
a
fairly
quiet
group
compared
to
certainly
groups
like
the
llc,
the
iab
and
the
isg
and
working
groups,
because,
hopefully
not
a
lot
of
legal
stuff
needs
to
be
done,
but
there's
a
few
things
we
do
need
to
keep
up
to
date.
One
of
them
was
the
itf
trust
website.
J
I
don't
think
it
had
been
updated
since
the
itf
trust
was
originally
created
many
many
years
ago,
so
we
undertook
in
2020
we
restructuring
the
website,
updating
it
refreshing
it
so
that
no
longer
looked
like
something
out
of
the
mid
1990s.
We
brought
it
up
to
date
with
you
know,
early
2000s,
at
least
styling.
J
One
of
the
big
reasons
we
did
this
by
the
way
was
we
wanted
to
create
an
easier
way
for
the
community
to
engage
where
they
needed
to
engage
with
the
trust
which
is
primarily
around
licensing.
You
know
we
get
requests
for
licensing
rcs.
How
do
you
do
that?
We
get
requests
for
licensing
using
our
logos
stuff,
like
that.
J
This
is
meant
to
be
a
front
door
and
help
people
understand
what
that
process
is,
how
to
engage
with
it
and
how
to
work
with
it.
The
other
thing
we've
done
recently
in
late
2020.
We
did
a
consultation
with
the
itf
community
around
some
clarification
of
the
iana
parameter
registry,
usages
they
themselves.
As
stated,
if
you
look
at
them,
they
don't
bear
a
copyright
statement.
We
had
to
take
a
look
at
that
and
decide
what
was
the
appropriate
thing.
We
did
a
consultation
with
the
community
feedback.
J
Our
goal,
of
course,
is
to
make
these
things
easy
to
use
with
minimal
process,
and
so
in
keeping
with
that
we've
heard
from
the
community
and
now
we're
working
with
ayanna,
and
I
can
legal
to
get
the
actual
implementation.
The
right
way
to
label
that
material
on
the
iana
registry
parameter
registry
site
and
make
sure
that
we
get
the
stuff
that
we
want
included
in
the
open
access
and
make
sure
the
things
which
we
don't
have
the
rights
to
or
need
to
be
bran.
J
You
know
bracketed
off
and
protected
because
maybe
the
itf
doesn't
have
rights
over
them
to
say
what
the
rules
should
be
are
correctly
implemented,
so
we're
working
with
ayanna
expect
something
to
be
coming
announced
up,
hopefully
in
q1
or
early
q2.
I
guess
we're
getting
pretty
close
to
q2
2021
on
that
next
slide.
Please.
J
So
we
have
some
other
stuff
we've
been
working
on.
We
of
course
daily
or
you
know,
as
they
come
up,
will
handle
license
requests
for
trust
assets.
That's
just
part
of
our
normal
day-to-day
business.
One
of
the
things
we,
however,
have
been
taking
a
look
at
is
we're
looking
at
to
see
new
situations
that
are
coming
up,
such
as
around
the
github
repositories
and
what
the
appropriate
way
to
label
things
and
make
sure
things
are
protected.
J
In
addition,
we
had
requests
suddenly
coming
in
for
things
that
are
non-traditional
things.
The
itf
would
grant
usage
rights
to
people
outside
the
itf2
things
like
wikis
and
stuff,
like
that.
This
is
above
and
beyond
our
traditional
rfc
content
that
we
already
have
well-established
processes
for
managing
or
things
like
our
trademarks.
We,
of
course
ongoing.
We
maintain
our
registered
trademarks.
That's
we
do
that
around
the
world.
They
are
not
things
you
just
do
once
and
you
walk
away
from.
You
have
to
maintain
them.
J
You
have
to
register
them
and
make
sure
that
they
are
kept
up
to
date,
and
we
also
well
defend
them
in
case
somebody
infringes
upon
them.
You
have
a
requirement
to
defend
the
mark
or
you
can
lose
the
right
to
use
it.
The
other
thing
is
we're
working
on
a
couple
of
things.
Right
now,
we've
been
re-looking
at
the
early
rfc
author
assignments
that
were
done.
J
If
you
know
some
of
the
history
of
the
itf,
the
trust
came
into
existence
fairly
late
into
in
the
itf's
long
existence,
and
so
the
early
rfc
assignments
were
handled
a
little
bit
differently
than
the
ones
that
are
today,
and
so
we've
been
reviewing
that
and
we're
going
to
go
back
and
make
sure
that
everything
all
the
transfers,
all
the
assignments
are
in
order
and
that
we
have
all
the
paperwork
in
hand
and
that
those
things
are
all
really
well
done
and
documented.
J
Likewise,
we're
going
through
and
reviewing
and
updating
the
list
of
assets
held
by
the
itf
trust.
The
iff,
trust
is
volunteers
and
there's
been
a
lot
turnover
through
the
years,
and
so
one
of
these
we're
trying
to
make
sure
we've
done
is
that
everything
and
all
the
institutional
knowledge,
including
the
list
of
every
asset
we
have,
is
well
documented
and
published
on
our
website
next
slide.
Please.
J
Finally,
if
you
need
to
get
a
hold
of
us,
there's
a
really
spiffy
new
design
website,
trustee.itf.org
or
you
can
email
at
trustees
itf.org.
Thank
you.
K
Good
day,
so
I'm
here,
I'm
magnus
westland,
I'm
here
to
talk
about
applying
and
evolving
quick
for
every
one
of
you
so
next
slide
and
I'm
the
outgoing
transport
lady.
So
I
had
the
pleasure
to
quite
recently
approve
quick
version:
zero
one,
zero,
zero,
zero,
zero
one
and
http
three-
and
this
is
it's
been
almost
five
years
since
the
buff
and
seen
lots
and
lots
of
github
issues
over
2000
there's
been
almost
eight
and
a
half
thousand
emails
on
the
working
group.
K
They
also
been
quite
a
lot
of
slack
discussion
between
implementers
and
the
result
here
is
really
six
high
quality
documents,
which
I'm
very
grateful,
and
I
really
want
to
thank
everyone.
That's
been
involved
in
this
process.
I
do
note
that
when
you
take
the
github
process
beyond
the
working
group
stage,
beyond
what
rc
describes,
we
did
run
into
some
process.
Issues
should
say,
with
an
atf
class,
called
an
isd
review,
one,
for
example,
about
collecting
feedback
in
idf
lost
call
and
the
review
teams
that
don't
see
that
request.
K
K
So
http
3
usage
is
already
quite
extensive
on
the
in
the
web.
It
will
continue
to
grow
and
will
evolve.
I
also
expect
to
see
much
more
https
usage
with
http
3
for
other
applications
than
the
normal
web
and
use
quick
as
a
transport
protocol,
maybe
for
your
protocol.
So
that's
it's
been
started
somewhere.
We
have
two
known
views
in
idf.
It's
dns
over
quick
and
mask
there's
some
more
different
cases
under
consideration.
K
K
K
It's
not
yet
ready
for
publication,
but
it
will
soon,
and
if
you
have
any
questions,
don't
hesitate
to
consult
the
quick
working
group.
It's
shares
or
potentially
transport
ids.
So
what's
good
to
know
here
is
that
if
you
trying
to
do
this,
realize
just
missing
something
quick
and
you
would
need
a
quick
extensions
to
solve
your
issue.
K
You
that's
one
case
where
you
really
should
start
discussing
with
a
quick
working
group,
because
if
this
is
general
extension,
then
maybe
it
should
be
done
in
quick
working
group
as
that
general
extensions.
If
it's
something
very
very
specific,
it
might
be
fine
that
you
do
it
in
your
own
group
and
another
thing:
if
you
start
experimenting
or
working
with
this,
don't
hesitate
to
register
a
provisional
code
point
by
jana
for
any
of
the
registration
so
and
do
that
as
soon
as
you're
ready
to
actually
start
having
that
implementation.
K
Quick
has
a
lot
of
extension
space,
there's
no
shortage
of
code
points,
most
fields
are
32-bit
longs
and
the
registration
rules
are
very
open,
so
to
say
so,
don't
hesitate
to
register
at
this
stage.
We're
also
doing
a
quick
recharging,
the
it's
out
for
external
review.
Currently,
it's
continuing
in
the
working
european
maintenance
evolution
of
the
basis
specifications.
K
So
I
hope
now
you
have
some
more
idea
where
quick
is
and
that
it's
ready
it.
Hopefully
it
will
be
published
within
weeks
the
first
basic
specs,
so
there's
nothing
that
prevents
you
from
using
it
from
a
reference
point
and
I
have
the
possibility
if
someone
has
any
clarification,
question
or
anything
around
this,
they
willing.
You
can
step
up
to
the
queue
and
ask
your
question
before
I
hand
this
over.
K
So
see
if
that
was
clear
enough,
thank
you.
Let's
go
on.
C
Yes,
thank
you
magnus
and
then
it's
actually
back
to
me
at
this
point
and
we
go
into
the
recognition
part.
If
we
go
on
the
next
slide.
C
We
start
with
the
iab.
We
have
this
times
four
outgoing
ib
members,
and
one
of
them
is
of
course
alyssa
who
has,
as
the
ietf
chair
has
also
been
a
member
of
the
iab.
I
have
to
say
I
really
enjoyed
working
with
her
the
last
year,
but
also
the
years
before,
where
I
was
an
ihd
member
and
so
had
like
even
closer
contact
with
her.
C
I
think
she
has
like
a
very
pragmatic
approach
very
often,
and
there
has
been
some
very
difficult
decisions
she
had
to
take
in
the
in
the
last
couple
of
years,
but
she's
usually
very
good
and
like
kind
of
listening
to
the
discussion,
but
then
also
finding
the
right
point
of
time
where
the
discussion
maybe
just
goes
in
circles,
and
she
can
make
a
pragmatic
proposal
to
move
forward
and
that's
kind
of
that's
an
a
skill
which
I
admire.
C
Maybe
that's
my
german
gems,
but
I
think
that
was
also
a
skill
that
was
very
useful
on
the
ib
and
the
discussions
we
had
over
the
last
year,
where
she
was
always
actively
contributing,
bring
him,
bring
him
our
own
views,
but
also
views
in
her
position.
C
C
C
So
he's
he's
been
very
active
in
in
bringing
topics
and
and
and
current
things
that
happen
in
the
world
to
the
iab
in
order
to
figure
out
if
the
ib
needs
to
discuss
it
and
needs
to
have
a
position.
So,
in
order
to
replace
that
kind
of
service
you
provided,
I
think
we
all
on
the
on
the
new
ib
have
to
work
together
and
replace
them.
C
But
you
know
stephen,
if
you,
if
you
want
to
push
an
email
to
the
iv
from
time
to
time,
make
sure
we're
aware
of
the
right
things
that
still
we
still
happily
take
that,
but
also
besides,
that
stephen
has
been
very
active
on
the
iab.
He
has
created
and
shared
the
model
t
program.
C
He
has
been
active
on
the
last
workshop
and
we
had
last
november
and
he's
usually
one
of
the
persons
who
raises
his
hand
if
there's
any
kind
of
admin
test
that
need
to
move
forward.
The
thanks.
A
lot
for
that
and
mark
actually
has
been
kind
of
equally
active.
I
have
to
say
mark,
has
been
on
the
ib
since
2017..
C
He
has
been
very
active
in
the
iab,
but
I
think
he's
also
very
active
in
in
the
in
the
ietf
as
a
whole
really
tries
to
drive
things
forward,
really
tries
to
make
the
internet
better
and
and
also
brought
like
in
that
sense,
his
fuse
into
the
iab
and
have
been
very
active
in
the
eye
being
in
different
position.
He
was
a
member
of
arsoc.
C
He
has
been
the
w3c
liaison
for
a
while
and
then
switched
over
in
the
shepherd
role
and
he's
also
one
of
the
persons
who's
kind
of
active
in
every
decisions
and
and
take
up
tasks
if
needed.
So
thanks
for
that
part
and
thanks
for
engaging
very
actively
and
then
jeff
jeff,
together
with
mark
and
eliza
and
yari,
actually
has
been
one
of
the
has
also
been
on
the
ib
since
2017.
C
So
as
like
three
of
those
four
people
are
stepping
down
and
and
like
jeff
was
also
one
of
the
persons
who
was
like
bringing
in
kind
of
this
knowledge
from
the
from
like
the
last
four
years
and
the
experience,
and
he
was
always
a
good
person
to
ask.
C
If,
if
you
need
to
know
about
something
that
has
been
a
long-term
activity
on
the
iab
or
has
been
discussed
in
previous
times,
so
that's
definitely
something
where
we
will
miss
him
and-
and
I
think
yari
has
to
now
pick
up
the
remaining
responsibilities
here
and
step
in
for
all
of
them.
So
again,
thank
you
all
three
of
you.
C
You
might
wonder
now
why
there
are
these
glasses
on
the
slide
and
on
the
one
hand,
this
is
a
little
bit
of
reminder
that,
like
the
last
year,
I
think
where
was
quite
challenging
for
all
of
us,
but
on
the
iab.
I
think
it
was
also
challenging,
especially
for
new
iab
members,
to
get
to
know
each
other,
because
we
usually
have
those
retreats,
or
we
also
meet
in
person
at
other
meetings,
where
we
really
get
to
know
each
other
a
little
bit
better
and
it's
it's
part.
C
The
retreats
give
us
enough
time
to
talk
about
technical
stuff,
about
topics
that
needs
discussion,
but
it
has
also
really
important
role
where
everybody
sits
together
and
just
gets
to
know
each
other
better
and
we
work
together
as
a
group
and
get
to
know
each
other,
so
that
was
definitely
missed
out.
We
tried
to
have
some
social
involvement,
but
I
don't
think
that
could
replace
it
it
fully.
So
what
we
will
do
here
is
that
all
of
you
will
get
shipped
some
nicely
iab
branded
glasses
and
the
respective
liquid
that
fits
into
these
glasses.
C
So
at
least
you
can
at
home
have
a
little
drink.
Remember
your
good
times
on
the
iab
and
and
cheer
on
on
the
iab
time,
and
then
hopefully
we
all
can
have
together
a
dream.
Even
so
you
might
not
be
on
the
ib
at
that
point
where
you
will
not
be
on
here
before.
At
that
point
of
time
anymore,
I
think
we
can
hopefully
all
have
a
drink
together
when
we're
back
in
person
somewhere.
A
A
I
think,
if
I
have
my
information
correct
of
each
having
served
six
years
on
the
iesg,
which
is
a
long
time,
I
can
tell
you
from
experience
and
they
were
not
all
consecutive,
so
barry
and
and
magnus
each
served
prior
terms
previously
and
then
came
back
for
a
third
term
magnus
going
back
to
2006,
I
think
was
when
he
started
his
first
term
and
barry
in
2012
deborah
served
her
six
years
consecutively,
so
a
sort
of
different
kind
of
glutton
for
punishment
there,
but
just
based
on
the
the
depth
of
that
experience.
A
I
think
for
for
barry
this
time
around
thinking
about
it
barry
and
I
were
co-id's
previously
in
the
art
area
and
thinking
about
the
art
area.
In
the
last
couple
of
years,
it's
been
a
little
bit
quieter
than
it
was
maybe
in
the
heyday,
but
there
were
a
few
really
significant
milestones
that
very
helped
to
shepherd
peru.
A
The
cap
working
group
has
completed
the
capper
architecture
and
the
catboard
api,
not
the
easiest
set
of
documents
to
to
get
through,
so
that
was
pretty
significant
and
then
very
recently,
barry
also
shepherded
the
process
of
taking
rdap
to
internet
standard,
as
we
all
know,
there's
not
that
many
protocols
that
have
gone
to
internet
standard,
so
that's
definitely
something
to
to
be
celebrated.
A
Debra
has
been
our
stalwart
traffic
engineering
guru
on
the
isg
for
a
long
time.
In
addition
to
all
of
that
work,
she
also
had
each
of
these
ads
really
had
their
share
of
document
suites
that
weren't
the
easiest
to
get
through
the
process,
but
they
persevered
and
so
for
debra.
A
What
I
remember
very
clearly
was
the
lisp
documents
she
shepherded
updates
to
a
suite
of
lisp
documents
in
the
last
year
or
two
and
again
that
was
that
was
a
long
process
with
lots
of
great
feedback,
in
particular
from
our
friends
in
the
security
area
that
that
really
made
the
the
output
much
much
better
and
she's
been
overseeing.
A
All
of
the
the
deterministic
networking
work,
the
detonate
working
group,
which
has
recently
gotten
a
bunch
of
their
documents,
approved
and
out
the
door
really
a
major
innovation
for
performance
guarantees
in
single
networks.
So
that's
that's
very
exciting,
set
of
developments
and
then
magnus
he
already
talked
about
quick.
A
I
just
have
to
say,
like
you
know,
there's
there's
an
infinite
number
of
jokes
about
when
when
quick
was
going
to
be
finished
or
when
quick
v1
was
going
to
be
finished
and
it
you
know
the
we
kept
saying
it's
going
to
it's
going
to
be
this
year,
it's
going
to
be
that
year
and
he
kept
getting
pushed
back,
but
magnus
did
manage
an
impressive
feat
which
was
to
basically
land
right
on
time
for
his
own
isg
cycle.
It's
always
painful.
A
When
big
document
suites
kind
of
get
left
get
passed
on
from
one
ad
to
another,
when
they
are
that
far
along
in
the
process
that
they
are
in
isu
review
or
they're
entering
ihg
review,
and
then
you
have
a
new
person
coming
in
so
super
big
kudos
to
magnus
for
pulling
that
off
and
actually
getting
the
v1
document
suite
through
the
whole
iesg
process
prior
to
stepping
down.
There's
there's
a
lot
that
goes
into
it
and
a
lot
that's
out
of
your
control
as
an
ad.
A
So
that's
pretty
impressive
and
then
just
since
you
know
highlighting
a
a
more
difficult
set
for
everyone.
Magnus
also
oversaw
updates
to
nfs.
Again
not
the
easiest.
One
of
those
documents
is
560
pages
long
and
I
think,
probably
the
longest
document
that
has
come
through
since
I've
been
on
the
ihg
for
many
years
and
and
you
can
only
imagine
if
you
weren't
on
the
inside
of
that
process,
the
the
trickiness
of
trying
to
get
at
this
document
done
at
560
pages.
L
All
right
thanks
so
much.
I
hope
you
can
hear
me
yeah,
so
so
we
snuck
that
on
there
to
surprise
you
a
little
bit.
So
what
this
is
it's
a
gift
to
the
outgoing
80s.
If
you
can
imagine-
and
we
unfortunately
can't
show
them
not
because
they're
censored,
but
simply
because
they
aren't
ready
so
we're
getting
digital
caricatures
made
that
you
can
use
as
your
avatar
or
you
can
like
get
them.
We
actually
gonna.
L
Send
you
a
framed
version
also,
so
so
the
participants
should
look
out
whether
your
data
tracker
picture
changes
soon.
I
think
they're
going
to
be
great.
The
artist
unfortunately
was
a
little
overwhelmed
and
couldn't
get
them
done
in
time.
So
that's
what
that
is
in
case.
You
were
wondering
next
slide.
Please.
L
Right
so
last
I
got
on
the
incoming
itf
chair.
I
want
to
spend
yet
some
more
time
to
praise
alyssa,
so
alyssa
became
the
ninth
chair
of
the
itf
in
2017.
As
most
of
you
probably
know
she
served
for
two
terms.
L
She
was
also
our
first
female
chair
and
before
that
she
started
from
the
a
as
an
ad
on
the
isg
and
she
served
on
the
iab
and
then
during
those
four
years
and
and
overlapping
with
some
of
her
time
on
those
other
bodies,
she
oversaw
quite
a
few
really
important
changes
to
the
organization
that
had
sort
of
internal
and
external
impact,
so
jason
already
talked
about
the
whole
isr
2.0
process
and
the
establishment
of
the
llc
and
lister
had
a
you
know,
fundamental
role
here,
both
as
a
member
of
the
iab
and
isg,
but
also
then
as
chair,
and
she
also
sort
of
helped
significantly
improve
the
the
funding
structure
working
with
eyesock
to
align
the
funding
stream
from
isoc
to
the
ietf
and
stabilize
that
which
is
sort
of
setting
us
up
for
a
hopefully
much
more
comfortable
future.
L
On
a
technical
side.
There's
a
lot
of
technical,
the
important
work
that
happened
with
her
at
the
helm,
a
lot
of
the
post,
snowden
security
and
privacy
milestones
that
we
worked
on
so
tls
1.3,
the
acme
work,
dot
and
doh
all
happened
under
chairman
womanship
magnus
talked
about
some
major
evolutions
to
their
websites,
such
as
quick.
L
There
was
also
webrtc,
which
is
a
similarly
sized
piece
of
work
that
was
done
while
she
was
chair
and
and
the
the
struggle
that's
still
ongoing,
of
how
itf
working
groups
use
github
started
under
her
chairwomanship
and
and
then
got
sort
of
formalized
into
the
two
rfcs
that
we're
now
using
to
you
know:
blueprinters
work
a
little
bit
better
externally.
Alyssa
was
extremely
good.
There
was
a
she
played,
a
key
role
in
a
successful
transition
of
the
ayana
functions.
L
She
chaired
the
icg,
the
iona
stewardship
transition
coordination
group.
She
dealt
with
a
lot
of
geopolitical
consequences
of
the
trump
administration.
There
were
travel
bans.
L
There
were
export
restrictions
that
led
to
consequences
for
who
could
meet
and
who
couldn't
meet
anymore
in
close
doors
that
had
a
lot
of
standards,
bodies
very
worried
for
a
while
and
then
finally,
covet
happened
right
right
at
the
end
of
her
second
term,
and
so
she
helped
the
organization
through
that
entire
experience,
which
surely
wasn't
easy
and
throughout
her
service
in
the
various
itf
leadership
roles
she's
held
and
especially,
I
think,
most
recently
as
chairs.
L
Come
through
time
and
time
again-
and
I
mentioned
she
separated
the
organization
through
some
really
significant
internal
external
transitions,
and
I
think
that
many
of
us
will
agree
that
she's
put
us
on
a
course.
L
I
think
that
will
have
a
very
positive
momentum
for
for
years
to
come
and-
and
I
will
certainly
benefit
from
that-
I
hope,
and
what
I
personally
admire
most
about
eliza
is
the
clarity
with
which
she
communicates,
especially
when
she's
in
the
spotlight
and
under
pressure
and
and
she
continuously
sought
and
found
consensus,
even
when
very
difficult
decisions
needed
to
be
made.
I
think
that
is,
you
know,
upholding
the
core
values
of
the
organization.
A
Well,
thank
you.
Thank
you
for
those
kind
words
and,
and
the
praise
it's
it's,
it's
truly
humbling.
I
really
just
wanted
to
thank
all
of
you.
Actually,
I
think
the
internet
is
a
marvelous
invention
and
every
day
it
still
strikes
me
how
it's
changing
the
course
of
humanity,
basically,
and
a
lot
of
that
comes
down
to
all
of
you
and
the
work
that
you've
done.
A
A
So
I
am
incredibly
gratified
to
have
had
a
little
tiny
opportunity
to
participate
in
that
and
try
to
affect
a
little
bit
of
change
here
and
there,
but
mostly
I'm
just
humbled
and
honored
to
have
been
a
part
of
this
community
and
to
you
know,
have
been
able
to
to
play
a
role
in
the
in
the
evolution
and
the
history
making
of
this
thing
that
we
call
the
internet.
So
thank
you
to
everybody
in
the
whole
community
for
that
and
to
lars.
I
wish
you
all
the
best.
A
L
So
instead,
since
we
really
can't
do
this
in
any
meaningful
way,
I'd
like
to
ask
all
of
you,
as
you're
sitting
here
in
the
plenary
typing
away
in
the
chat
room
to
maybe
take
a
minute
or
two
and
sort
of
send
her
an
email,
but
and
thank
her
for
her
for
her
service
and
your
words
and
maybe
remember
an
anecdote
that
you
shared
with
her
or
send
her
a
photo
that
you
have
and-
and
you
know,
tell
her
yourself
how
you
feel
about
her
leadership
in
the
last
few
years.
L
Thank
you
alyssa
before
I
continue.
I
sort
of
want
to
take
a
minute
or
so
to
introduce
myself
to
you
in
case.
You
haven't
come
across
me
yet
as
the
incoming
itf
chair,
so
my
name
is
lawrence
edgard.
I
work
for
netapp,
I'm
german.
I
live
in
finland
for
the
conspiracy
theorists
amongst
you.
I
live
in
the
same
small
town
as
yari
arco.
L
L
There
was
a
research
result
out
of
isi
and
and
what
I
most
vividly
remember
about
that
entire
meeting
was
that
stephen
kent
did
not
like
that
presentation
at
all.
I
kept
attending
anyway,
eventually
became
working
group
share
and
transport
and
then
ad
of
the
transport
area
and
and
fun
fact
you
can
become
an
id
even
without
ever
having
published
an
rfc
on
the
I-test
stream,
so
in
case
you're
worried
about
that.
L
If
that's
a
qualification,
it's
not
more
recently,
I
shared
the
irtf
for
a
number
of
years
and
following
that
I
shared
the
quick
working
group
and,
as
I
get
up
to
speed
in
sort
of
this
new
role,
I'd
like
to
invite
the
participants
sort
of
to
reach
out
to
me
email
me
or
ask
for
a
zoom
meeting
and
let's
chat
about
anything.
That's
on
your
mind.
L
This
is
what
we
would
normally
do
in
the
hallways
or
the
bar,
which
we
can't
do
at
least
this
meeting,
and
possibly
the
next
one
I'll
also
be
in
gather
town.
So,
if
you
see
me
there,
before
or
after
sessions
or
in
the
breaks,
reach
out,
say
hi
and
let's
start
chatting-
and
I
want
to
thank
you
guys
for
the
trust
that
you've
placed
in
me
next
slide.
L
Which
I
think
we
can
go
to
the
next
one,
which
is
the
passing
of
the
dots,
so
so,
with
this
funky
eyes
slide
here,
the
the
old
leds
are
off
the
hook.
The
new
ids
are
on
the
hook.
Everything's
transitioned
over,
I
know
cindy
in
the
background,
has
been
busy
operating
at
the
data
tracker.
L
So
all
of
us
have
like
20
million
inbox
emails
in
their
inbox,
informing
us
what
has
happened
with
various
working
groups
and
teams
and
so
on,
and
as
we
stare
those
dots,
we're
gonna
open
the
microphone
lines
for
the
isg
part
of
the
open,
open
mic
next
slide,
please.
L
So
this
is
the
incoming
and
outgoing
isg
that
are
they're
all
still
going
to
be
here,
at
least
for
the
open
mic
part.
L
We
have
gotten
some
questions
by
email.
I'm
gonna
read
them
in
no
particular
order
and
we're
gonna
have
some
responses,
and
then
you
guys
are
also
free
to
ask
questions
over
the
meat
echo,
of
course,
but
let's
start
with
those,
let's
get
started
with
those
two
we've
gotten
by
email
and
since
we
didn't
clarify
whether
we're
gonna
have
these
questions
be
anonymous
or
I'm
not
gonna
mention
who
sent
them
in.
L
If
the
person
who
sent
the
question
then
would
like
to
identify
themselves
in
a
chat
or
come
to
the
microphone
in
response.
Please
do
so,
but
don't
feel
obligated
to
the
first
question
says:
are
you
satisfied?
You
isg
satisfied,
there's
a
suitably
robust
procedure
to
ensure
a
clear
separation
of
roles
when
a
working
group
co-chair
is
a
co-author
of
an
internet
draft.
L
Just
posting
an
email
with
a
no
hats,
disclaimer,
sometimes
seems
a
little
weak,
for
instance,
when
emails
relate
to
progressing
the
document,
such
as
call
for
adoption,
consensus
decisions,
working
with
class
call
and
so
on,
rather
than
the
documents
contents.
These
potential
conflict
of
interest
issues
sometimes
arise
at
working
group
sessions
too.
B
Yes,
hi,
I'm
barry
lieber
and
yes,
I
I
think
we
are
satisfied
in
general,
the
the
general
thing
of
chairs
having
technical
contributions
in
their
working
groups,
and
we
expect
that,
and
for
that
I
think
giving
a
no-hat
statement
is-
is
adequate
when
a
chair
is
an
author
on
a
document.
B
That's
why
we
have
co-chairs.
That's
why
we
have
responsible,
aeds
and
there's
always
somebody
to
take
over
the
management
of
the
document
process
so
that
the
author,
the
chair
who's,
an
author,
does
not
have
to
make
the
decisions
on
consensus
and
any
further
processing
of
the
document.
So
I
think
we're
pretty
good
on
that.
B
We
have
in
in
the
iesg,
we've
had
a
number
of
situations
where
an
ad
is
an
author
on
a
document
and
asks
a
co-ad
to
handle
the
the
processing
of
that
document.
So
in
general
we
have
a
good,
a
good
system
for
handling
this,
with
all
the
different
people,
with
their
responsibilities
and
their
backups.
L
L
L
C
B
Yeah,
the
the
llc
led
this
with
setting
up
a
conflict
of
interest
policy
for
llc
board
members,
and
the
iab
has
since
also
done
a
conflict
of
interest
policy.
B
Disclosure
policy
and
the
iasg
has
been
working
on
one
for
a
while
and
is
just
about
finished
that
you
should
see
something
public
about
that
very
soon.
The
disclosure
policy
specifies
the
conditions
under
which
we
are
supposed
to
disclose
conflicts.
What
sorts
of
conflicts
we're
talking
about,
and
I
think
that
will
increase
transparency
on
that
for
a
long
time.
Of
course,
we've
been
disclosing
who
our
affiliations
are
with,
and
this
goes
a
bit
beyond
that
and
expands
on
that
so
expect
to
see
a
conflict
of
interest
policy
officially
from
the
iasg.
B
L
All
right,
the
third
question
we
were
sent
was
about
what
the
plan
for
itf
111
is,
and
I
think
jason
talked
about
this
a
little
bit
about
pointing
out
that
there's
a
consultation
going
on.
But
in
any
case
this
is
mostly
a
question
for
the
llc
and
for
jay,
which
is
why
we're
punting
it
over
to
that
open
mic
session,
and
with
that
we
come
to
the
end
of
the
questions
we
got
by
email.
L
So
if
there's
any
questions
from
the
audience
now,
please
get
in
line,
and
we
have
andrew
in
line
already
go
ahead.
Andrew.
M
Hi
good
good
day,
probably
is
the
best
greeting.
I
I'll
also
post
this
question
in
the
chat
in
case
it's
hard
to
follow
with
audio
yeah.
M
Essentially,
we
see
a
lot
more
groups
moving
work
to
github
and
they're,
using
it
in
different
ways,
and
often
it
strays
so
beyond
the
original
sort
of
stated
use
of
just
using
it
for
some
purely
editorial
discussions,
and
it
seems
in
some
places
that
almost
the
entirety
of
the
discussion,
the
meaningful
discussion
at
least,
is
on
github,
with
just
the
conclusions
being
posted
back
to
the
list,
which
I
think
I
would
argue,
does
exclude
some
potential
contributors
and
can
have
quite
a
bad
impact
on
diversity.
M
L
Thanks
yeah,
I
I
can
speak
to
that,
since
the
quick
working
group
is
maybe
the
worst
offender
here
in
recent
memory
and
I'm
one
of
the
chairs.
So
quick
is
really
a
very
complex
protocol
and
the
short
answer
is
that
I
don't
think
we
could
have
done
quick
if
we
hadn't
used
github
in
the
way
we
we've
been
using
it
and
we
tried
hard
to
not
exclude
anybody.
For
example,
we
set
up
a
second
mailing
list
that
was
basically
mirroring
all
the
issue,
discussion
and
pr
discussion
that
happened
on
github.
L
I
don't
think
we've
seen
that
been
actually
very
much
used.
I
think
I
remember
the
top
of
my
head
like
one
or
two
participants
that
initially
used
the
email
feedback,
but
then
very
quickly
switched
to
github.
I
obviously
have
no
data
about
people
who
never
reply
to
the
email,
but
I
I
simply
think
we
could
not
have
done
this
without
a
way
to
track
issues
that
was
allowing
discussion
and
allowed
us
also
to
refer
to
the
the
text
in
the
specification
as
part
of
the
discussion,
in
a
way
that
didn't
involve
copying
and
pasting
text.
L
L
If,
if
there's
anything
else
that
can
be
clarified
there,
I
think
we
should
do
that
since
I
don't
think
the
use
of
github
is
going
to
decrease
in
the
itf
and
magnus
already
mentioned
in
his
section
on
quick
that
how
we're
gonna
be,
you
know,
extend
the
github
process
into
the
isg
and
then
the
rfc
editor
phase
of
the
document
life
cycle
is
an
open
question
at
the
moment,
and
we
have
one
example
where
we
did
this
with
quick,
but
but
we
don't
know
if
that's
the
best
way
to
do
it.
B
Yeah-
I
guess
I'm
talking
a
lot
here,
but
yeah.
I
want
to
expand
on
one
thing
that
andrew
brought
up
was
that
if
using
git
excludes
some
people,
I
I
think
over
time
the
ia,
the
ietf,
has
to
modernize
its
tools
and
move
into
different
tools,
and
this
is
an
example
of
a
situation
like
that,
where
we
are
moving
to
some
hybrid
of
email
and
github
and
and
we're
just
anybody
can
get
a
github
account.
I
think
so
I
don't.
I
don't
think
we
are
actively
excluding
anybody.
O
Yes,
so
I
I
just
wanted
to
also
add
to
that.
You
know
we
do
have
people
using
github
for
issue
discussion,
but
the
text
ultimately
makes
its
way
into
the
draft.
Now
we
have
lots
of
places
that
we
can
discuss
drafts
and
it's
also
not
the
case
that
github
is
sort
of
uniquely
privileged
in
this
regard.
L
I
don't
see
any
other
responses
from
the
isg,
so
let's
move
to
the
next
question.
M
Well,
it
is,
I
thought,
I'd
give
something
else
a
chance
first,
but
well,
let's
see
if
this
also
provoked
promise
of
response.
But
thank
you
for
your
answers.
By
the
way,
I
think,
there's
a
discussion.
M
That's
needed
a
slightly
different
attack,
but,
but
I
guess
also
potentially
just
hitting
on
diversity
in
in
the
sense
of
allowing
people
to
be
involved
if
they
wish
there's
an
awful
lot
of
work
going
on
in
interim
meetings,
particularly
since
coved
for
obvious
reasons,
and
there
does
seem
to
be
a
risk
of
shutting
out
so
either
people
that
are
busy
or
miss
the
the
relevant
mailing
list,
post
of
interims
happening
or,
frankly,
just
don't
have
the
bandwidth.
M
If
some
of
the
working
groups
are
almost
having
bi-weekly
interims,
which
is
quite
a
significant
ask
of
people,
and
there
is
a
risk.
I
think
that
that
will
really
reduce
the
diversity
of
views
just
to
those
people
whose
sole
focus
is
on
the
itf
and
will
exclude
those
that
have
other
jobs
to
do
so
again.
M
Does
the
sort
of
leadership
have
thoughts
on
maybe
how
to
get
more
representation
into
interims
and
or
how
to
get
the
the
important
discussions
happening
in
the
main
ietf
meetings
to
ensure
there's
a
broader
range
of
participation?
E
So
great
question
I
mean
certainly
the
cadence
of
meetings
can
be
challenging
to
include
folks,
but
I
I
don't
think
we
have
a
new,
a
new
situation
here
in
covit
pre-covatons
I
mean
there
was
the
ability
to
have
the
cadence
in
the
meetings
cadence
meetings
at
any
any
particular
time.
E
As
long
as
it
follows
processes,
I
think
that's
really
the
thing
we
needed
to
be
very
cognizant
of
during
cougar
times,
as
everyone
became
very
comfortable
with
the
the
various
kind
of
remote
meetings
that
we
kept
to
the
practices
of
two
weeks
notice
minutes
as
required.
So
folks
can
follow
up
as
required.
I
will
also
say
just
anecdotally,
where
I've
seen
working
groups
have
frequent
frequent
interim
meetings.
We
actually
see
higher
quality
specs
and
we're
talking
more
about
it
and
we're
getting
documents
pushed
pushed
at
a
faster
pace.
C
Yeah,
I
also
I
wanted
I
want
to
mention,
because
that's
something
we
discussed
in
the
isg,
but
also
the
problem.
We
had
any
ib
that,
of
course,
dynamics
a
little
bit
different
when
you
meet
only
online
and
you
have
to
manage
your
time,
and
so
I
think
it
actually
makes
sense
for
working
group
shares
and
all
participants
too
and
to
to
rethink
about
how
they
want
to
use
their
meeting
time.
I
think
it's
actually
very
good
to
see
that
in
the
interim's
discussion
is
sometimes
much
more
focused
on
specific
issues.
C
While
we
use
the
planar
meetings
to
have
like
more
cross-area
participation
and
so
on,
I
think
we
can
do
more
in
making
sure
that,
on
the
one
hand,
we
can
use
meeting
her
most
efficiently
and
make
progress
on
our
work,
and
why
also
have
sync
up
times
from
time
to
time
where
we
keep
other
people
in
the
boat
and
work
together.
So
I
think
this
is.
C
This
is
something
where
we
can
learn
from
the
current
situation
and
we
should
reconsider
and
we
should
have
also
previously
all
been
working
on
trying
to
improve
how
we
use
our
meeting
time.
P
Yeah
I
at
the
risk
of
being
glib.
I
will.
I
will
parody
the
question.
As
you
know,
can
everybody
please
stop
working
so
hard
it?
It
disadvantages
people
who
don't
have
enough
time
to
work
that
hard
on
that
on
the
working
groups
on
the
working
groups.
Work
which
I
expect
is
not
really
the
intention,
but
at
least
interims
I've
participated
in.
P
I
I
want
to
agree
with
maria
that
they,
or
at
least
what
I
think
she
said,
which
is
that
they
tend
to
have
a
more
focused
and
interactive
agenda,
which
I
think
is
a
good
thing,
not
a
bad
thing.
P
If
we
are
having
adoramas
where
we're
just
reading
slides
at
each
other,
then
that's
that's
a
negative,
but
if
we're
having
interims
where
actual
work
to
move
working
groups
forward
is
happening,
I
I
see
that
only
as
a
positive
thanks.
L
Let's
go
to
the
next
person
in
line
which
is
philip.
If
you
look
go
ahead.
Q
Yeah
hi
yeah.
I
just
wanted
to
follow
up
that
and
say
I'm
used
to
other
standards.
Organizations
where
the
bi-weekly
conference
call
is
the
usual
way
of
doing
things,
so
I'm
actually
fully
on
board.
With
this
more
frequent
interims
thing,
I
suspect
that
it's
coming
up
because
of
covered.
It's
changed
a
way
in
the
which
people
are
working.
Q
However,
maybe
what
we
need
to
do
is
to
rethink
the
way
that
we
use
plenaries
so
that,
instead
of
thinking
of
the
plenary
and
the
interim,
just
being
the
same
thing
and
interim
being
more
akin
to
an
editor's
meeting
in
which
the
everybody
who
wants
to
can
participate-
and
you
work
the
issues
list
and
the
plenary
meetings
being
more
outreach
explaining
yourself
to
the
wider
community,
explaining
where
you
are,
where
you're
trying
to
do
and
the
consequences
of
the
design
decisions
made.
Q
So
the
wider
group
can
then
say:
oh
right,
yes,
you've
decided
to
do
this,
but
that
makes
your
protocol
not
work
for
green
foots
with
souls,
and
the
other
thing
I'd
say
is
that
we
really
could
do
with
some
sort
of
tool
that
would
aggregate
information
on
when
all
these
meetings
are
taking
place,
so
that
when
I
I'm
planning
out
my
calendar,
I
can
look
in
one
place
and
see
oh
right,
the
six
interim
meetings
in
the
next
three
weeks.
Q
These
are
the
ones
I'm
really
interested
in.
I
will
schedule
that
time
and
I
think
that
we
could
you
know
if
we
thought
of
this
as
an
opportunity
to
rethink.
We
can
be
more
productive.
L
Thank
you,
phillip.
The
one
thing
I
want
to
quickly
point
out
that
there
is
actually
the
data
tracker
has
an
ical
subscription
that
it
was
subscribed
to
that.
Has
all
the
upcoming
itf
interim
meetings,
so
you
can,
you
can
at
least
see
them
in
your
calendar.
I
actually
use
that
quite
a
bit
and
then
somebody
probably
has
already
put
the
url
in
the
in
the
chat.
If
not,
maybe
somebody
could
do
that.
So,
that's
quite
helpful.
R
Do
you
hear
me,
yes,
go
ahead
mike?
Actually
it's
a
question
and
expectation
also,
I'm
expecting
that
from
the
directors
of
the
areas.
Let's
say
we
have
five
areas
and
the
directors
to
direct
the
working
groups.
So
I
worked
with
some
working
groups
or
I
had
attended
meetings
and
there
are
some
documents
or
drafts
while
they
get
to
the
last
call
or
the
working
group
last
call
I'm
expecting
the
director
to
okay
to
have
let's
say
a
meeting
with
with
the
chairs
and
direct
that
document.
R
It
may
be
interacting
with
other
working
groups
or
other
areas
with
as
out
of
the
area
of
the
director
and
the
same
time,
I'm
expecting
to
be
feedback,
getting
a
feedback
that
this
have
been
happened.
But
if
I
don't
know
what's
happening
between
the
director
and
the
chair,
how
can
I
interact
with
other
areas
or
working
groups?
So
I'm
in
one
working
group?
R
This
is
my
interest
and
I'm
expecting
that
there's
some
kind
of
interaction
or
some
kind
of
information
getting
to
me
and
also
or
a
window
or
a
channel
I
can
go
to
it.
Has
this
kind
of
drafts
or
documents
which
is
in
the
working
group
last
call,
and
it's
interacting
with
other
areas
or
other
working
groups?
R
I
was
expecting
that,
but-
and
I
didn't
see
that
much
in
iet-
if
maybe
there
is
something
I
didn't
know
about,
but
anyway
this
is
number
one
and
I
will
hope
in
the
next
plenary
meeting
or
the
next
meeting,
that
this
kind
of
iesg
gave
us
a
report
which
are
the
documents
that
had
went
through
some
kind
of
process
which
went
to
make
it
more
efficient
and
more
helpful
for
our
areas,
because
usually
internet
is,
is
a
technology
that
needs
some
kind
of
integration.
R
Usually,
now
technologies
are
more
integrated,
so
we
have
to
focus
on
the
the
integration.
I
remember
that
one
participant
I
think
jerry
yeah,
he
he
was
interested
in
the
cross
cross
working
group
thing
you
know,
so
I
think
it
was
proposed
before
and
I
don't
know
where
this
anyway.
This
is
my
expect
or
my
question.
You
can
say
it's
a
question
or
expecting
and
I
hope
I
get
comments
on
that.
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank.
S
Indeed,
that's
an
interesting
question,
of
course,
and
we
should
address
this
cross
working
group
or
cross
arrears
connection
and
reviews
as
early
as
possible,
and
I
must
say
a
bit
to
my
not
so
comfortable
thing
with
it
does
not
always
happen
as
the
interior.
We
see
arriving
document,
for
instance,
about
dns
or
about
rpv6
that
are
lacking
a
lot
of
thing,
but
we
see
it
only
in
the
atf
last
call.
So
basically,
the
earlier
this
cross
area
crossed
working
group
is
addressed
the
better
we
do
agree
now.
S
There
is
no
real
process
on
this.
It
relies
on
the
working
group
shares
and
for
the
working
group
chess
in
the
participation.
Here
I
remind
that
you
can
ask
for
an
early
review
in
all
the
directorates
right
for
them,
the
young
doctors,
the
iot
directorates
or
whatever,
because
you
know
the
content
of
the
draft,
and
so
you
can
address
it
to
the
different
directorates
and
that
will
be
helping
a
lot
on
the
other
end
right.
So
in
the
ing
you
also
have
informal,
telechart
or
from
alternate
chat
where
we
can
say
hey.
S
This
document
is
kind
of
linked
to
let's
say
quick
or
to
ipv6
or
to
dns
or
to
whatever
and
then
suggest,
to
make
another
review.
A
working
group
last
call
or
specific
last
call
review
by
specific
working
groups
and
again
as
I'm
interested
in
ipv6.
Quite
often,
six
man
is
involved
in
this.
So,
yes,
it's
relies
on
the
human
beings,
so
it's
imperfect,
but
we
it's
really
close
to
our
heart
as
the
lg
for
sure
hope.
It
helps.
L
Thanks
eric
next
person
in
the
queue
is
elliott.
I
did
go
ahead.
N
N
This
is
a
highly
contentious
topic
as
people
know,
but
we've
made,
I
think,
great
strides
in
the
group.
The
the
all
the
members
should
be
really
proud
in
terms
of
just
how
far
the
group
has
come
in
this
regard.
I
don't
think
we
could
have
done
that
without
interims.
N
It
took
a
long
time
for
us
to
level
set
our
our
views.
It
took
a
long
time
I
think,
for
people
to
to
find
ways
to
find
common
ground
and
having
that
quote
face
time,
if
you
will
had
has
really
helped
us,
we
did
have
to
come
to
consensus.
I
think
on
how
often
to
meet
I
I
wanted
to
push
for
two
weeks.
N
The
one
the
two
aspects,
rather
that
I'd
like
to
bring
bring
forth,
though,
is
that
I
think
the
group
was
hampered
a
little
bit
by
the
fact
that
we
couldn't
meet
in
person
in
that.
Sometimes,
when
you
have
contentious
issues,
it
helps
to
break
up
the
with
a
beer
in
between,
if
you
will
or
coffee,
if
you'd
rather,
the.
N
The
other
point
I
was
going
to
make
is
that
the
interim
activities,
I
think,
have
actually
opened
up
the
the
the
group
to
people
who
might
not
have
otherwise
participated
simply
because
they
couldn't
travel
in
to
the
meetings
that
we
might
have
otherwise
had.
We
might
have
considered
having
an
interim
had
we
having
the
opportunity.
N
So
this,
of
course,
directly
relates
to
the
discussion.
That's
going
on
the
gen
gen
dispatch
in
terms
of
how
is
it
that
we're
inclusive
and
I
I
don't
claim
that
there
is
a
single
recipe
here,
but
maybe
other
groups
work
differently.
They
don't
need
those
interims
quite
as
much
because
you
can
just
do
work
in
email
because
it's
you
know
very
there's
a
nice
synergy
everybody's
pushing
in
the
same
direction.
But
if
you
do
have
contention
it
really
does
help
to
have
people
talk
it
out.
Thanks
very
much.
L
Thanks
for
the
input
elliot
next
in
the
queue
is
jim
jim
go
ahead.
E
Okay,
hi
thanks
I'd
like
to
go
back
to
the
topic
of
github
for
a
minute,
so
there's
rfc,
8874
and
88.75,
which
are
great
and
tell
working
groups
how
to
use
github
and
thanks
to
the
secretariat
for
reminding
the
chairs
of
that
recently,
but
there's
also
a
github
organization.
That's
just
called
ietf
and
there's
several
repositories
there,
and
I
have
a
couple
concerns
there.
One
is
that
it's
not
clear
what
the
status
of
those
documents
are.
E
Just
the
fact
that
the
repository
that
the
organization
is
called
ietf
kind
of
makes
it
seem
like
they
might
have
some
official
status
more
so
than
others,
and
that
needs
to
be
made
clear,
at
least
in
the
individual
repositories.
E
I
also
don't
see
that
the
note
well
is
consistently
displayed
and
so
forth
there,
and
so
I'd
like
to
kind
of
ask
that
we
get
some
clarification
on
how
that's
used,
what
it's
used
for
and
that
we
that
we
have
all
of
those
usual
processes
in
place
to
make
sure
that
contributions
are
appropriate
and
that
the
the
status
of
documents
there
generally
not
representing
iatf
consensus,
is
clear.
Thanks.
L
So
I
think
one
part
of
your
question
is
specifically
about
the
github.com
ietf
organization,
we're
actually
recently
sort
of
started
in
the
background,
a
little
activity
to
bring
that
use
under
a
little
bit
more
rigor
in
terms
of
making
sure
that
repositories
satisfy
a
certain.
You
know
rough
set
of
criteria
like
they're,
like
of
broad
organizational
applicability
and
that
they
have
descriptions
and
they
have
websites
and-
and
you
know
the
notebook
is
displayed
and
so
on.
L
This
is
sort
of
an
ongoing
process
that
I
started
and
it
takes
a
little
bit
of
time
because
some
of
those
repositories
need
to
migrate
outside
of
the
organization,
but
some
of
them
belong
to
documents
into
working
groups
that
that
you
know
where
that
would
be
a
little
bit
disruptive.
So
this
is
this
is
ongoing.
L
The
second
part
of
your
question.
I
think
it's
a
little
bit
more
about
the
broader
use
of
github,
and
I
think
we
talked
about
this
already
that
we
we
have
the
two
rfc's
you
mentioned,
that
that
give
us
some
guidance
on
what
we
should
be
doing,
but
I
don't
think
they're
the
end
state.
I
think
they're
sort
of
a
good
start
that
give
us
some
some
rules
that
have
proven
to
work
well,
but
I
think
we
will
need
additional
guidance
on
how
we're
gonna
use
get
up
even
better
in
the
future.
L
Right
tortoise
is
next
and
I'm
going
to
cut
the
mic
line
after
him,
since
we
have
some
other
open
mics
to
get
to
well,
let's
go
ahead.
T
Yeah
and
not
sure
if
this
is
the
right
open
mic,
but
let
me
quickly
propose
something
you
know
to
to
the
organization
and
maybe
the
the
isg
would
be
the
best
one
to
drive
it
in
terms
of
you
know.
Looking
back
and
celebrating
the
organization
by
you
know
around
itf
112
think
about
you
know,
setting
up
a
one
day
workshop
to
bring
in
you
know
the
people
we
may
not
have
any
more
in
10
years
to
basically
give
presentations.
You
know
maybe
20
minutes
each
about.
T
You
know
the
core
technologies
and
things
that
happened.
You
know
in
in
the
organization
and
at
that
time,
and
if
it's
not
clear
what
the
opportunity
is
then
look
at
the
publishing
date
of
rfc
791
which
to
me
you
know,
for
the
ietf
would
be
the
best
opportunity
to
celebrate
something
and,
as
I
said
right
in
it's
40
years
and
in
10
years,
more
we'll.
We
won't
have
a
lot
of
of
the
people
who
started
it.
L
That's
a
good
suggestion,
and
I
I
agree
that
it's
unclear
whether
it's
an
isg
activity,
there's
probably
also
an
iap
angle
to
it,
but
we'll
we'll
take
that
up.
Keep
in
mind
that
idf
112
might
also
be
the
first
one
we've
had
in
a
while.
That
is
going
to
be,
hopefully
a
physical
meeting
again,
so
there
might
be
some
already
some
additional
complexities
with
organizing
that
so
we'll
see
what
we
can
do.
L
T
Yeah,
I
think
that
maybe,
if
it's
before
ietf
and
would
be
virtual,
I
think
there
would
be
a
lot
of
people
worldwide
to
you
know
join
in
on
on
on
a
video.
You
know
live
stream
of
that
right.
So
it's
certainly
something
that's
for
much
broader
community
of
interest
than
the
ones
who
made
it
happen
like
the
itf
itself.
L
That's
a
fair
point
and
we
should
discuss.
Maybe
if
you
care
to
start
an
email,
for
example,
to
the
itf
manager.
We
can
discuss
something.
What
format
attacks
is
not
quite
clear
whether
it,
for
example,
would
need
to
be.
You
know
in
the
itf
week
or
whether
we
actually
do
a
separate
event
at
some
other
time
and
have
a
smaller
like
itf
focused
event
during
the
meeting
week
for
what
we
do.
L
Thank
you,
and
with
that
I
think
the
isg
open
mic
is
at
its
end.
Let's
move
on
to
the
next.
C
One
yes
once
more
hello,
so
we
didn't
get
any
free
questions
to
the
open
mic.
To
be
honest,
I
also
didn't
ask
explicit
fully
for
it
but
like
as
always,
you
can
always
send
emails
to
iab
iv.org
to
me
personally,
if
you
want
to
know
something,
but
now
we're
here
for
the
open
mic.
So
please
join
the
queue
and
ask.
M
Apologies,
I
was
desperately
hoping
that
somebody
else
might
like
go
first,
but
then
I
didn't
want
you
to
decide
there
weren't
any
and
move
on
and
miss
the
opportunity.
So
I've
got
a
question
related
to
when
some
new
standards
are
proposed.
I
I
wonder
whether
now's
the
time
to
start
assessing
them
for
their
so
the
potential
to
really
exacerbate
the
current
trend
towards
century
centralization,
rather
like
that,
there's
already
some
external
input
on
the
security
aspects,
which
doesn't
mean
to
say
that
proposals
shouldn't
go
forward.
M
If
there
are
certain
consequences
on
centralization,
but
at
least
the
trade-offs
will
be
would
have
been
considered
and
documented
because,
in
my
view,
the
current
driftward
centralization
is
highly
unlikely
to
be
in
the
long
term,
interests
of
end
users,
so
contrary
to
rfc
8890,
and
therefore
I
think
it
really
shouldn't
be
made
worse
as
more
new
standards
are
brought
on,
and
I
wondered
whether
the
iab
leadership
had
any
views
on
this
and
whether
you
think
action
is
indeed
needed
and
now's
a
good
time
to
start.
Thank
you.
U
Yeah
good
question,
thank
you
and
I
think
there's
going
to
be
different,
differing
opinions
on
this
in
the
iab
and
as
well
as
the
iit.
If
I
personally
do
believe
that
that's
a
it's
a
big
issue-
and
we
should
be
concerned
about
that-
and
I
think
some
of
the
discussions
we've
been
having
in
some
working
groups
are-
are
actually
about
that
to
some
extent.
Of
course,
that's
not
the
only
only
issue
in
front
of
us.
U
U
Maybe
people
have
requested
that
the
token
is
on
me
and
I
have
failed
to
deliver
so
far,
but
it's
still
on
the
task
list.
So
that
is
something
that
that
we
are
looking
at.
C
Yeah
definitely
I
just
want
to
ask,
because
I
wasn't
sure,
andrew
what
we
proposing
or
having
your
mind
or
whatever,
but
we
definitely
talk
about
this
from
an
architectural
point
of
view
and
we
try
to.
As
always,
we
try
to
understand
what
the
issues
are:
provide
guidance
to
the
community
and
hopefully
see
an
update
and
of
yaris
draft
there
very
soon
and
keep
the
discussion
going.
But
then
I'm
not
sure
if
you
ask
for
actually
kind
of
process
changes.
I
think
if
that
should
actually
impact
process.
C
That's
definitely
also
a
question
for
the
for
the
isg
and
and
see
how
this
is
taking
up
and
we
have
west
there
as
well.
V
Thanks
and
and
man
yep
here
we
go
thanks,
good
question,
that's
certainly
a
topic
that
has
been
hop
very
hot.
On
my
mind,
in
fact,
on
my
whiteboard
behind
me,
I
have
a
list
of
different
ways.
The
internet
is
centralized
because
I've
been
thinking
about
it
for
a
while
the
one
thing
that
I've
learned
a
lot
in
the
last
couple
of
years.
Thinking
about
it,
though,
is
that
it's
very
much
a
trade-off.
It's
not
just
that
centralization
is
all
bad.
V
I
personally
don't
use
many
centralized
services,
because
I
think
it's
bad
for
me,
but
the
other
thing
you
have
to
recognize
is
it
actually
enabled
a
lot
of
very
strong
usage
of
the
internet
that
wouldn't
exist
today
without
it
centralized
file,
sharing
services
and
centralized
easy
to
create
web
management.
You
know
web
pages
and
things
like
that
end
up
in
very
very
centralized
services,
which
is
which
is
greatly
benefited
users
as
well
as
in
a
recent
academic
paper.
I
co-authored.
V
We
actually
measured
ways
where
security
was
suddenly
fixed
for
a
large
quantity
of
users,
because
the
centralized
service,
you
know
fixed
some,
pretty
severe
security
bugs
and
it
actually
or
you
know,
deployed
dns
or
didn't.
You
know
deployed
https
everywhere
on
all
of
their
sites,
all
at
once.
So
it's
a
big
trade-off
issue
and
centralization
is
a
huge
risk
to
privacy,
though
so
you
have
to
balance
all
of
those,
so
the
the
the
thinking
is
long
and
arduous.
So
thank
you.
W
Hello
yeah,
I'm
I'm
concerned
about
centralization
as
well.
I
I
do
get
concerned
that
you
know
if
we
have
a
bar
for
centralization
or
some
other
measure
like
that,
you
know
effectively.
We
would
never
have
standardized
the
web,
because
the
web
is
to
be
seen
as
just
a
big
engine
for
centralization.
To
be
honest
because
of
the
dynamics
of
how
it
it
works.
W
I
am
interested
in
in
more
concrete
kind
of
measures,
especially
we
brian
tram,
and
I
have
a
draft
that
we've
been
living
language
for
too
long
about
checkpoints
in
the
internet
architecture
and
how
we
can
prevent
their
formation,
and
I
think
that's
a
concrete
thing
these
community
can
look
at
is
where
does
this
centralize
power
so
much
that
it
gives
someone
inordinate
power
over
people's
experience
of
the
internet?
W
But
but
having
said
that,
I
think
we
also
need
to
recognize
that
technical
limits
on
centralization
are
often
not
going
to
be
effective
and
competition
law
ones
may
be,
and
we
should
be
looking
to
work
with
the
folks
who
are
looking
into
that
now
and
then
giving
them
good
technical
advice
where
we
can.
X
Yeah,
so
just
on
this
topic,
I'd
also
like
to
chime
in
that.
I
think
the
centralization
concerns
that
people
bring
up
often
times
are
kind
of
pointing
at
certain
protocols
that,
in
and
of
themselves,
are
not
fundamentally
related
to
being
centralized
or
not.
I
think
andrew.
I
know
we've
had
these
discussions
around
the
use
of
dns
and
encrypted
dns
and
dough,
and
I
think
those
are
often
pointed
at
fundamentally.
These
pieces
of
technology
are
not
necessary,
necessarily
centralized,
but
it's
the
kind
of
the
market
in
the
deployment
models.
X
I
think,
as
far
as
what
is
it
appropriate
for
iab
to
do
or
the
isg
to
do,
I
don't
think
we're
going
to
be
able
to
say
you
know:
thou
shall
not
have
centralization,
and
probably
what
is
more
useful
is
to
point
out
the
areas
where
we
can
provide
mechanisms
and
technical
solutions
to
help
decentralize
things
to
help
make
it
viable
to
have
a
non-centralized
model,
and,
let's
not
focus
on
you,
know,
demonizing
any
technologies
that
happen
to
be
having
to
work
well
with
centralized
models
and
decentralized
models.
X
Let's
focus
on
what
are
the
missing
pieces
that
make
it
hard
to
create
generic
decentralized
solutions,
so
it's
more
of
a
call
to
action
than
a
call
to
stop
working
on
things.
C
Very
good
point
so
with
that
I
think
we
move
on
to
philip.
Q
Q
I
cannot
change
my
email
provider
because,
if
I
do,
my
email
account
address
will
change
and
the
stuff
will
be
going
to
a
different
place.
So,
of
course
you
know
I
own
my
own
domain
name,
because
that's
the
only
way
that
I
can
earn
my
account,
but
that
cost
me
ten
dollars
a
year,
which
is
a
significant
fraction
of
many
people's
annual
incomes,
and
you
know,
maintaining
a
domain
name
is
a
significant
technical
barrier
for
many
people
a
lot
of
the
times.
Q
There,
of
course,
is
blockchain
current
currently
consuming
as
much
electricity
as
the
entire
nation
of
argentina,
and
so
what
I
I'd
urge
people
to
look
at
is
how
do
we
give
the
user
the
ability
to
own
their
own
account
so
that
they
can
have
a
lifelong
email
address
that
they
can
take
to
one
provider
to
an
at
to
another
that
follows
them
around,
so
that
they
can
switch
without
incurring
a
penalty?
And
if
you
provide
that
capability,
I
can
also
switch.
Q
It's
it's
not
decentralized,
but
what
I'm
trying
to
do
is
to
shrink
the
border
of
the
centralized
piece
to
the
absolute
bare
minimum
and
then
create
a
infrastructure
around
that
that
makes
that
public
goods
in
the
way
that
we
try
to
do
with
icann
and
completely
fail.
C
Thanks
looking
forward
to
that
proposal,
but
that
might
be
actually
more
interesting
for
the
ia,
the
ietf
as
a
whole
and
for
the
ib.
But
we
also
have
the
ib
open
meeting
tomorrow,
where
we
can
have
more
of
these
technical
discussions
if
needed,
and
then
dominique.
Y
Yeah,
I'm
hoping
we
can
pick
this
up
a
bit
more
tomorrow
in
detail.
I
just
wanted
to
say
that
this
is
definitely.
It
sounds
like
a
call
to
action
and
and
it's
not
about
demonizing
like
one
technology
or
the
other,
but
it's
about
list
listing
the
problem,
space
right
and
all
the
different
issues
that
are
coming
up,
which
I've
started
to
do
with
both
mark
and
elliot,
and
I
have
a
draft
on
consolidation
that
I
can
point
everyone
to,
but
yeah.
Y
U
Yeah,
thank
you.
There's
a
lot
of
wise
things
said
by
many
people.
I
want
to
pick
up
on
something
that
tommy
actually
said.
I
think
that
that
was
the
essential
piece
that
it's
it's
not
not,
that
we
need
to
sort
of
ban
some
things
but
find
find
the
missing
pieces
and
and
work
on
that.
U
I
think
that's
exactly
right,
and
this
is
not
about
like
extremes,
like
a
lot
of
people,
bring
these
examples.
But
we
can't
have
you
know
the
web
or
we
can't
have
you
know
or
we
shouldn't
have
the
the
bitcoin
architecture
or
you
know
kind
of
like
extreme
ends
of
the
spectrum,
but
but
it
really
is
about
sort
of
choice
that
you
have
like
the
situations
where
you
know
something
works.
U
Well,
you
know
if
you
configure
one
ip
address
somewhere
or
one
one
name
name
somewhere
that
doesn't
have
like
discovery
mechanisms
and
tommy,
for
instance,
has
worked
on
some
some
discovery
mechanisms
before
some
some
protocol
cases.
So
I
think
those
are
the
kinds
of
things
that
actually
help
us
and
and
dominique
was
of
course
also
right
that
documenting
the
issues
is
a
key
and
understanding.
U
It's
like
sort
of
this
pervasive
surveillance
discussion
that
we
document
the
issues
and
then
we
try
and
evaluate
the
situation
when
we
produce
documents,
and
then
we
have
some
understanding.
It's
not
that
we
can
totally
prevent
some
outcomes,
but
we
can
at
least
be
a
little
bit
more
aware.
So
I
think
that's
the
key
yeah.
AA
So,
for
about
a
centralization,
I
think
the
internet
is
still
distributed.
Architecture
and
decentralized
internet
architecture
is
still
decentralized.
What
about
the
centralization,
I
think,
is
service.
International
service
is
a
centralized
internet
application
centralized.
For
example,
we
do
use
facebook
for
social
internal
social
service
and
for
gmail
for
our
email
service.
So
so
because
we
are
a
very
service
pro
internet
application.
Server
service
providers
provide
a
very
good
service,
so
we
a
lot
of
users,
are
attracted
to
join
the
this
internet
service
service
house
applications.
So
it's
providers
so
so
so
yeah.
O
AA
Our
itf
would
provide
more
good
applications
protocols
or
some,
so
there
will
will
be
more
service
in
another
service.
Pro
providers,
so
I
maybe
internet
will
internet
service
will
be
decentralized
decentralized.
So
my
my
point
is
internet
is
still
decentralized,
but
the
internet
service
is
centralized.
AA
AB
This
is
in
response
to
gary
a
little
bit
and
I'm
really
glad
to
hear
that
he's
going
to
pick
up
the
pen
and
do
some
writing.
But
one
of
the
observations
I
have
in
listening
to
this
conversation
is
that
there
are
a
lot
of
voices
in
the
room
and,
as
yari
noted,
sometimes
some
conflicting
voices
and
I
think,
instead
of
trying
to
find
a
middle
ground.
I
think
it's
time
to
let
those
voices
speak,
and
so
perhaps-
and
this
is
a
suggestion
to
the
iab.
AB
Perhaps
this
is
a
natural
opportunity
for
a
workshop
on
the
topic
so
that
the
iep
can
hear
in
a
in
a
workshop
setting
from
a
variety
of
voices
on
this
topic
and
and
perhaps
to
do
that
before
committing
the
ib
to
documenting
a
particular
architectural
stance.
AB
I
do
think
that
the
pervasive
surveillance
example
is
a
good
one
right
because
it
actually
jumped
the
chasm
between
the
iab
and
the
iesg
and
resulted
in
real
protocol
design
and
criteria
for
protocol
design,
and
I
think
that
that's
what's
needed
here
is
some
architectural
direction
that
jumps
that
chasm
again.
That
leads
to
criteria
for
good
protocol
design.
That's
what
engineers
want
in
this
space
thanks.
C
Yeah,
everyone
just
to
add-
and
I
think
that
was
already
clear-
that
this
is
like
a
topic
that
the
ib
actually
does
discuss
for
a
while
already
and-
and
we
also
discussed-
I
believe-
the
opportunity
to
have
a
workshop.
But
it's
also
very
broad
topic
with
a
lot
of
different
thoughts.
As
you
can
see,
right
now
and
and
for
workshop,
you
have
to
narrow
it
down
to
to
make
it
productive.
C
Anymore,
I
cannot
read
up
the
whole
chat
now
and
see
if
there's
anything
I
need
to
reply
to,
but
I
think
last
year
just
here
to
tell
me
that
we're
done
with
the
ib
open
mic
or
do
we
want
to
add
something.
I
Thank
you
and
we
can
now
begin
the
llc
open
mic
session.
One
quick
note
I
forgot
to
mention
during
our
slide
presentation:
there
are
llc
office
hours
this
week,
they're
on
the
agenda
and
looks
like
they
are
occurring
on
thursday
and
friday
of
this
week.
L
I
Right,
well,
I
will
say
a
few
things:
one
it
the
sort
of
what
is
return
to
normal.
If
you
will
is
one
of
the
topics
for
the
strategic
offsite
and,
of
course,
shmu
is
working
on
that
as
well,
and
I
think
they'll
have
to
be
a
lot
of
consultations.
Of
course,
the
for
the
next
meeting
the
process
has
kicked
off.
We
agreed
on
a
process
for
assessing
whether
a
meeting
can
proceed
or
not
really
right
after
the
beginning
of
the
pandemic,
so
we're
using
the
standard
process.
For
that.
I
I
think
the
operative
question
is
whether
you
know
that
return
to
normal,
if
you
will,
whether
it's
111,
112
or
whatever,
is
a
blended
sort
of
thing
where
it's
a
mix
of
online
and
in
person-
and
I
think
you
know
we
would
all
conclude
the
answer.
That
seems
very
likely.
Yes,
but
exactly
you
know
what
that
will
look
like
and
when
we
can
return
to
normal
really
mostly
depends
at
this
point
on.
I
All
right
hearing-
none,
I
think,
we're
finished
with
this
section.
Thank
you.
L
Thank
you,
and
if
I'm
not
mistaken,
this
was
the
last
section
on
the
agenda.
So
if
I
tell
alexa
next
slide
there
shouldn't
be
any
correct,
looks
like
it.
Thank
you
all
enjoy
the
rest
of
your
day,
the
rest
of
your
night
and
see
you
around
the
idea
for
the
next
few
days.
Bye.