Skip to main content

RSSAC Meeting, Washington DC, 2004

RSSAC - 20th Meeting

Washington DC. at the Hilton Hotel

- Rob Austein note on IAB/IESG issues
- Anycast
- Security
- IPv6
- Measurement
- ICANN Liason
- List Maintainance
- Future
- 6 Mar 2005 @ Minneapolis

IAB/IESG issues: - Jun Murai

- Server ID
- IPv6 Anycast: a draft on clarifing anycast is needed
- DNSEXT WG requesting publication of DNSSECbis specs

Bill Manning: we should try and answer the outstanding questions with existing IAB/IESG - before March 2005

Anycast: - Paul Vixie
No new features, there is incremental growth with much the same architecture
Mark Kosters presents data from nanog on the "J" instance. Highights are: unexplained jitter
TCP concerns - does not seem to affect UDP
Stay the course.
Mark Kosters: - still doing analysis to understand events
David Conrad: - any similar data from others?
Paul Vixie:- no - but may be due to the nature of the way we do anycast. Lars Liman: - no - but we have not done the analysis.
Daniel Karrenberg: - our measurements for "K" do not see what "J" has found. - may be where we are looking from?
Akira Kato: - M is still evolving - no data as of yet
Bill Manning: - v6 anycast is an open issue, per previous agenda item

Security: - Steve Crocker
I n SD, asked when the servers will be ready to serve DNSSEC signed zones. the minutes recorded a mid 2005 date as the earliest reasonable time. Key items are:

must have useable S/W
test said S/W
todays business
DNSSEC queries
Consensus process - when will RSSAC tell ICANN the servers are ready?

That said, dnssec is becoming deployable in the user community but for this task Second half 2005 seemed about right. is there any change? should a poll be taken? should we ask the ssac/rssac liason (who turns out to be Johan!)

Ray Plzak: - when will RSSAC answer the question on readiness?
Steve Crocker: - want to add these things to the deployment roadmap.
Bill Manning: - what are the drivers to adopt new S/W? These will impact the projected timescales for some operators.
Ray Plzak: - will there be an audit to determine "readiness"?
Johan Ihren: - how will readiness be tested? - does not answer if an independent audit can be done.
Bill Manning: -It may be unlikely that an audit is possible without other resources.
David Conrad: - will ICANN be ready to provide signed data?
Steve Crocker: -Yes. but the time is not yet settled. A nominal ready date, for planning purposes has been the spring ICANN mtg.
John Crain: - that is not a firm date.

Straw-poll - still on track w/ 2h2005 - must migrate to 93x/94x, NSD, or equivalent software that has the feature set needed.

Rollout Timeline Guess
A 6mo - 1yr
B end of 1st half 2005 (7 mo)
C Feb 2005
D Early Summer 2005
E 6 - 12 Months
F Running Compliant
G New Guy - Unsure
H not present
I Less than 6mos
J 6mo - 1yr
K Within 6 mo
L 6 - 12 mo
M testing + 3mo (6 - 12mo)

IPv6 status: - Bill Manning

Native IPv6 transport for the root servers or AAAA glue for these servers in the root zone requires a recommendation. The recommendation can not be made at this time because we do not understand the stablity impact in the interaction with the deployed software base. A delayed item from San Diego was to build a matrix and then test these interactions. We will have a meeting later this week to construct the matrix and build test cases.
A recommendation on IPv6 anycast needs to be written. The concern here is that the IPv4 anycast techniques are not the same as the anycast techniques for IPv6 as defined by the IETF.

PMTU - we will document what we think our issues are and pass to SSAC and the IETF. Johan write the PMTU document, will be circulated to SSAC then published as in Internet Draft.

Measurement: - Jun Murai

Yuji Sekei presents Wide project data:

Table1 shows probes at 12 new locations and Table2 shows the results of previous and current probes.

RSSAC members will assist in getting more probe points in places like Africa and the Carribean.

Suzane Woolf: - OARC update. CAIDA has received an NSF award of 3m USD over 36 months to study the DNS. ISC is coordinating some of this effort through its OARC project.

ICANN Liason: Jun Murai

Jun used to perform this function when he sat on ICANNs board. Need a replacement since he can not commit the time to participate. A short list was generated, woolf, Ihren, manning from last meeting. The rssac chair would like to use Woolf but wants input from the committee as a whole.
Bill Manning: - will she accept?
Mark Kosters:- what is the term? and what are the responsibilities?
Steve Crocker:- not technical, have full bot access. discussion lists, telephonic meetings, does not on committees, must represent RSSAC issues to ICANNs board. must stay for the duration of all ICANN meetings.
Mark Kosters:- Conflict of Interest concerns?
Johan Ihren: I can not commit the time.
Bill Manning: I am willing but would have to resign from another position
Suzanne Woolf: I am willing - needs to be done.
Mark Kosters:- would any of the candidates be conflicted due to the .NET re-bid item that is currently under consideration by the ICANN board?
(discussion: no clear answers from anyone to Marks question)
Jun Murai: -would postponing will be problematic?
Steve Crocker - missed having rssac present at ICANN board meetings.
Paul Vixie:- the choice should be based on qualifications not biases.
Bill Manning: - as chair, Jun should make a choice and we should support that choice. And he should make the choice this week.

Jun Murai: - will report back to the committee on Thursday this week.

LIST: updates from crain to be applied

Future: 06mar2005 mins
2870 update lead by Bill Manning and Lars Liman.

Notes taken by: Cathy Murphy, Bill Manning, Steve Conte, Brian Coppola


Domain Name System
Internationalized Domain Name ,IDN,"IDNs are domain names that include characters used in the local representation of languages that are not written with the twenty-six letters of the basic Latin alphabet ""a-z"". An IDN can contain Latin letters with diacritical marks, as required by many European languages, or may consist of characters from non-Latin scripts such as Arabic or Chinese. Many languages also use other types of digits than the European ""0-9"". The basic Latin alphabet together with the European-Arabic digits are, for the purpose of domain names, termed ""ASCII characters"" (ASCII = American Standard Code for Information Interchange). These are also included in the broader range of ""Unicode characters"" that provides the basis for IDNs. The ""hostname rule"" requires that all domain names of the type under consideration here are stored in the DNS using only the ASCII characters listed above, with the one further addition of the hyphen ""-"". The Unicode form of an IDN therefore requires special encoding before it is entered into the DNS. The following terminology is used when distinguishing between these forms: A domain name consists of a series of ""labels"" (separated by ""dots""). The ASCII form of an IDN label is termed an ""A-label"". All operations defined in the DNS protocol use A-labels exclusively. The Unicode form, which a user expects to be displayed, is termed a ""U-label"". The difference may be illustrated with the Hindi word for ""test"" — परीका — appearing here as a U-label would (in the Devanagari script). A special form of ""ASCII compatible encoding"" (abbreviated ACE) is applied to this to produce the corresponding A-label: xn--11b5bs1di. A domain name that only includes ASCII letters, digits, and hyphens is termed an ""LDH label"". Although the definitions of A-labels and LDH-labels overlap, a name consisting exclusively of LDH labels, such as"""" is not an IDN."