# Presentation: 920426

## Internet Standards Processand the Public Interest

- A Presentation to the President’s Council of Advisors on Science & Technology (PCAST)
- By
- Robert E. Kahn
- March 22, 2005

## The Internet Standards Process

- The Internet standards process is key to the evolution of the Internet
- Multiple Groups are involved, but the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) plays a dominant role
- Challenges for the IETF:
- Insuring a level playing field for all participants
- Combining innovation with Stability
- Clearing impediments to Architectural change
- Assurances against default capture by special interest groups – funding considerations
- Representing the broader public interest

## How was the Internet Standards Process developed?

- Initially, it was part of a DARPA research project and managed by DARPA (1973 – 1985)
- In 1978, DARPA formed an Internet Configuration Control Board (ICCB) consisting of twelve network implementers from the  research community plus the DARPA leadership
- The ICCB meetings were open to “listeners” and by 1983 we had hundreds of attendees for a meeting of twelve principals.

## Internet Activities Board (IAB)

- The IAB replaced the ICCB in 1983
- It too, consisted of twelve members, and began with ten working groups
- By 1986, there were over fifty working groups all coordinated by the IAB
- One of the working groups, called Internet Engineering, was asked to coordinate the working groups and to report to the IAB.
- This became known as the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)

## The Role of NSF

- NSF followed the DARPA effort by expanding the networking base to the larger research and education community in the U.S.
- It created NSFNET and expanded network connections internationally
- It assumed responsibility for supporting the IAB and the IETF in the 1980s after DARPA terminated its ongoing networking programs via a Cooperative Agreement with CNRI
- Direct U.S. Government support ended at the end of 1997 when the Cooperative Agreement ended
- At that point, continued support seemed possible from meeting attendance fees.

## What is the IETF?

- Developed as a consensus-based mechanism for developing Internet Standards – grass roots, bottom up
- Open to anyone who wishes to participate
- The IETF is now organized into more than 100 working groups with its own management structure
- The leadership consists of:
- IETF Chair, Area Directors, Working Group Chairs and a Steering Group (IESG).
- Publication of Standards via “RFC Series”
- Coordination with IANA on various matters
- More recently, with Internet growth and uptake, the workload has increased, and the IETF has been forced to slow down and try to adapt

## Method of Operation

- Working Groups (WGs) meet as they please, where they please, and much work occurs on the Internet
- New WGs require approved charters
- Three meetings per year, two in the US
- Typical attendance 1000 – 3000 people
- Funding primarily from attendance fees
- Financial support from CNRI as needed; plus meeting sponsorships
- Much activity on-line, mailing lists, automated tracking/dispatching of actions, etc.

## Original Model of Support(1988 – 1997)

- CNRI

- IETF

- NSF

- Oversight,
-        $

- Support
- Services

- Technical
- Leadership

- Technical
- Work done
-    here!

## Subsequent Model of Support(1998 – present)

- Foretec
- Seminars

- IETF

- CNRI

- Oversight,
-        $

- Support
- Services

- Technical
- Leadership

- Technical
- Work done
-    here!

- Foretec created in 1998
- as a subsidiary of CNRI

- Enable the
- IETF Secretariat
- In the public interest

## Issues with the Current Mode of Operation

- Meeting attendance down significantly in past 3 years – Internet bubble, 9-11, etc, maturation of the IETF
- Shortfalls in past two years, staff reductions
- Lack of agreement on supplemental funding sources with IETF leadership  undermanned
- Use  of “dot org” support being explored to supplement meeting fees via Internet Society
- No mechanisms to regulate demand for service
- Or renegotiate changes in available  resources

## IETF Attendance & Revenue

- Attendance for 3 Meetings per year
- Gov’t funds used through 1997
- Attendance rose until 2000 then fell
- Prognosis for the period 2006 - 2010 is 2500 - 3000/year

## One Proposed Restructuring Model

- IETF

- Secretariat

- RFC Editor

- IANA

- IETF Foundation

- Fund Raising &
- Public Interest Oversight

- Technical Leadership &
- Standards development

- Other
- Funds

## Current Restructuring Plan

- Buyer

- FT

- CNRI

- Sale of
- Foretec
- Seminars

- Trust

- IETF

- New Service Provider

- Transfer of
- IETF-related
- IP and other
- assets

- License

- IASA

- Internet Administrative
-     Support Activity

- Oversight
- Committee

- Administrative
- Director

## IASA

- An IETF Activity for administering the Internet Standards Process
- The IETF Administrative Director (IAD) would be an employee of the Internet Society
- The IETF Administrative Oversight Committee (IAOC) would consist of eight voting members and the IAD who serves, ex officio, as a non-voting member of the IAOC

## IAOC Voting Members

- 2 members appointed by a nominating committee of the IETF
- 1 member appointed by the IESG
- 1 member appointed by the IAB
- 1 member appointed by the Internet Society Board of Trustees
- The IETF Chair (ex officio)
- The IAB Chair (ex officio)
- The ISOC President/CEO (ex officio)

## IAD Responsibilities

- Manage the IASA to meet the administrative needs of the IETF
- Establish an operating budget and administer IETF finances
- Issuing RFPs, helping to select service providers and negotiating contracts
- Managing business relationships
- Establishing mechanisms to track performance

## IAOC Responsibilities

- Provide direction to the IAD on behalf of the IETF leadership
- Oversee the functioning of the IASA (not an operating role)
- Specifically
- Select the IAD and provide high-level review and direction
- Review plans and contracts
- Develop corrective actions where needed
- Temporarily assume duties of the IAD, if there is no IAD or the IAD is unavailable

## Ensuring the Public Interest

- The IETF has been effective in managing the development of Internet Standards to date
- It may have mattered less in the past, but at present, there is no formal means within the IETF to ensure the broad public interest is addressed
- Only those who can afford to attend IETF meetings and participate in the process are likely to influence the development of standards
- There is no test of the larger public good, and no means to affect technical decisions about standards whose implications may go beyond the interests of IETF participants

## Some Concerns?

- The IETF believes the current processes are satisfactory to meet future needs and that they are able to change them, as appropriate
- The United Nations wants to play a role in this domain, especially with the convergence of online and wireless technology, including now telephony and video services
- Some nations feel that “legitimacy” requires a body like the UN to play a leading role
- Despite its origins, most private sector business groups are convinced that the Internet cannot flourish under Government dominion, whether the UN or any individual government.

## Possible Next Steps?

- Cause a dialog to be initiated involving multiple stakeholders to identify the public interest issues which require attention and are effected by technical choices that have impact beyond the purely technical
- Use these results to inform ourselves (as a nation) and to work with other informed nations in moving forward with a domestic and global agenda to address these issues
- The list of issues are potentially quite large; a small  sampler set might include:
- Identifying and protecting against anti-competitive technical practices; empowering disadvantaged citizens on the net; allowing for interoperability among different information systems; providing visibility into information management practices; building network-based diagnostic and forensic tools