Internet Standardization and the IETFITU Telecom ‘99 2 Thoughts I would like to address •IETF History, Structure, and Procedure Who’s who in the IETF •Relations among standards

1 ITU Telecom ‘99

Internet Standardization and the IETF

Fred Baker

IETF Chair

2 ITU Telecom ‘99 www.ietf.org

Thoughts I would like to address

• IETF History, Structure, and Procedure

Who’s who in the IETF

• Relations among standards bodies

Who does what and why

• The big problems in the Internet

Ongoing work

How we’re going to solve them

3 ITU Telecom ‘99 3

IETF History


Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)

• Historical developer of internet-related protocols

http://www.ietf.org

Consortium of individuals from

Research,

Education,

Network operators, and

Internet vendors


Changed IETF composition and roles

-500

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

1

4

7

10

13

16

19

22

25

28

31

34

37

40

43

46

IETF Number

Att

en

dan

ce

Actual Avg..

Vendor/International

Research/Education

primarily US


Growth of international involvement in IETF

• Principle for placement of meetings:

“If I am doing the work, the meeting should sometimes be in my neighborhood”

• But most work is done on mailing lists anyway…

• Non-US Meetings:

1990: Vancouver

1993: Amsterdam

1994: Toronto

1995: Stockholm

1996: Montreal

1997: Munich

1999: Oslo

2000: Adelaide


USA 71.6%

Other

5.5%

JAPAN 7.6%

Sweden

1.8%

Germany

1.9% France 2.0%

Canada 3.1% UK 4.2%

Netherlands 2.2%

IETF Growth by Country

• December 1996

• 11 Countries

• July 1999

• 33 Countries

Japan

6%

USA

48%

Other

8%

Italy

2%

Netherlands

3%

Canada

3%

France

4%

Finland

4%

Germany

5%

Norway

5%

UK

6%

Sweden

6%


IETF Structure


IETF structures and key forums

• Internet Architecture Board

• Internet Engineering Steering Group

• Working groups in eight areas


Internet Architecture Board (IAB)

• Mission

“Supreme court” on appeals of IESG decisions

Think tank for future internet activities

• Recent activities

Really worried right now about

•End to end model of the internet

•Impact of wireless communications


Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG)

• Mission

Assure open-ness and adherence to process

Working group chartering and management

“Quality assurance” on specifications

• Activities and trends

Currently drawn into a “privacy” debate

Better addressed in area activities


Working groups in eight areas

Internet

Routing

Transport

Applications

Security

Network operations and management

User services

General


Internet

• Mission

IP/foo specifications

Interface configuration and management

IP developments, mostly IP6

• 15 working groups

Interface mibs, dnsind, dhcp, ipng, IP/cable|ADSL|IEEE 1394, PPP, ion, ...


Routing

• Mission

“So how does a packet get there, anyway?”


BGMP, MPLS, MSDP, manet, vrrp, bgp, ospf, idmr, SNA...


Transport

• Mission

QoS management

End to End delivery issues

Telephony issues


Diff-serv, int-serv, megaco, sigtran, audio/video, rap, ...


Applications

• Mission

Infrastructure applications development and extension

Historical applications


Web, LDAP, edi, nntp, smtp, ftp, telnet, calendaring, mime, etc.


Security

• Mission

Developing procedures and protocols to enhance security in the internet


Ipsec, pki, transport layer security, web transaction security, pgp, one time password, etc...


Network Operations and Management (O&M)

• Mission

Making sure there is operational clue looking at the specifications and procedures

Network management (used to mean SNMP)

Making those two talk with each other

Y2k


Snmpv3, policy, various mibs, agent extensibility...

Ngtrans, year2000, mbone deployment, routing policy system, ...


User Services

• Mission

Provide documentation of IETF procedures to less involved communities


Responsible use of the net

Web elucidation of internet-related developments

FYI updates

User services


General

• Mission

If we can’t think of another place to put it, it goes here

• 1 working group

Poisson: standing rules committee


Working group summary

• We have ~120 working groups

Not all currently active

• Cover support of infrastructure for the commercial IP internet

Not too worried about research network, unless they use the same technology


IETF Process


Membership

• IETF members are people

As opposed to nations or companies

• Communications tend to be among people

As opposed to working groups, boards, etc.


Fundamental working principle

“

”

We do not worry about

presidents and kings;

We work by rough consensus

and running code Dr. David C. Clark,

Massachusetts Institute of Technology


Two types of documents

• Internet Drafts

• RFC - “Request for Comments”


Internet Drafts

• Most analogous to ITU “contributions” and “working papers”

Not necessarily work items

Half of all internet drafts are simply documents people have chosen to post

• Types of drafts

Working Group documents

Submissions to working groups

Individual Submissions


RFCs

• Historical Archive

• Many kinds of documents

Informational

Historical

Experimental

Standards

• Standards

Proposed, Draft, Full

Best Current Practice


Development Process

• Bottom-up

WG charters developed to support work people want to do

• Development Process

Working groups develop

IESG reviews

RFC Editor publishes


Relations among standards bodies

“Anyone who likes legislation or sausage should watch neither one

being made”

Baron von Bismarck


Historical role of various standards bodies

• ITU-T

• IEEE

• ETSI

• W3C

• IETF

• Various marketing fora

ATM Forum

ADSL Forum

MPLS Forum

etc...


Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)

• Primarily link layer LAN standards

http://ieee.org/

Especially LAN standards in 802 series

IEEE 802.1 Bridging

IEEE 802.3 CSMA/CD Networks (Ethernet)

IEEE 802.5 Token Ring Networks


European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI)

• European Telephony Standards

http://www.etsi.org

GSM Telephones

WAP - Wireless Access Protocol


World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)

• Primarily Web services

http://www.w3.org

Headed by Tim Berners-Lee, inventor of HTML

• Developed HTML, XML, etc.


ITU Telecommunication Standardization Sector (ITU-T)

• Primarily related to telephony

http://www.itu.int/ITU-T

Consortium of

Telephone companies

Their traditional vendors


ITU-T Developments

• Various connector standards

X.21, V.35, etc.

• Physical/Link layer network standards

X.25, Frame Relay, ATM, SDH

• Telephony on specific substrate

H.32x/H.310

• Specific collaboration:

H.323 uses IETF Data format

• Points of possible overlap with IETF

IP/SDH

MPLS

IP/ATM

ISO JTC1 voice control

IP Telephony call signaling


IETF: Infrastructure protocols

• Some link layer

PPP

• Network Layer

IP4, IP6

Routing protocols

• Transport Layer

TCP, UDP, RTP

• Security services

Transport Layer Security, IPSEC, ISAKMP

• Telephony Signaling

Signaling transport

• Quality support

Differentiated Services

Integrated Services


IETF: Infrastructure applications

• SNMP management

• SMTP mail

• DNS name services

• LDAP Policy services

• telnet virtual terminal protocol

• FTP file transfer

• HTTP Web transfer

• and more...


How IETF sees work divided

• Applications come from all over

• IETF

Provides network infrastructure

Tends to use interfaces defined by other bodies

HTML

HTTP

UDP RTP

Ethernet ATM Frame Relay PPP

Cellular Radio

Telephony

Signaling

A variety of physical layers and interfaces

Internet Protocol

TCP

Mail SNMP

Voice/ Video

Data

IEEE ETSI

W3C

ITU-T

MPLS


So where is the Internet going?

“As for the future, your task is not to foresee, but to enable it.”

Antoine de Saint-Exupéry


IETF vision for the future

• Short term

Internet as interconnected competing service providers

• Long term

Internet as universal interconnect


Internet as interconnected competing service providers

• Dominated by

Service Providers and

Large enterprises

• A “network of networks” which have different policies and goals


Internet as universal interconnect

• IETF believes that the internet is the network of tomorrow

Telephone companies seem to agree

But how intelligent a network?

• Would like to see common procedures and protocols used throughout

Minimize translation problems


• Email

• Information search/access

• Subscription services/“Push”

• Conferencing/ multimedia

• Video/imaging

250

200

150

100

50

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Traffic Projections for Voice and Data

Rel. Bit Volume

Circuit Switched Voice

Data (IP)

“From 2000 on, 80% of Service

Provider Profits Will Be Derived

from IP-Based Services.”

Source: CIMI Corp.

Growth of IP Traffic

Source: Multiple IXC Projections

Cross over date

varies with

measuring point


In summary...

“I came, I saw, I couldn’t believe my eyes”

Julius Caesar,

as portrayed in Asterix in Britain


When standards collide...

• Increasingly, convergence of Internet and PSTN networks causes collisions between the bodies that define their protocols and procedures

• The solution has to be in finding ways to:

Not compete in standardization

Focus on the problems remaining to be solved


The place of standards bodies

• Each has its place in the mix

We need to work together on a global basis

• Competition between standards promotes inability to

Share solutions to common problems

Communicate among subscribers

Internet Standardization and the IETFITU Telecom ‘99 2 Thoughts I would like to address •IETF History, Structure, and Procedure Who’s who in the IETF •Relations among standards

Documents