[Din] Fwd: IAB Workshop Call for Papers: Design Expectations vs. Deployment Reality

"Dirk Kutscher" <ietf@dkutscher.net> Sat, 13 April 2019 13:41 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@dkutscher.net>
X-Original-To: din@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: din@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C311C120013 for <din@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 13 Apr 2019 06:41:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.889
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.889 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mi7rmsxSMq8X for <din@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 13 Apr 2019 06:41:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mout.kundenserver.de (mout.kundenserver.de []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 79049120189 for <din@irtf.org>; Sat, 13 Apr 2019 06:41:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ([]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (mreue012 []) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MsJXG-1h0FpK0tOU-00tnYY for <din@irtf.org>; Sat, 13 Apr 2019 15:41:04 +0200
From: Dirk Kutscher <ietf@dkutscher.net>
To: din@irtf.org
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2019 15:41:02 +0200
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.12.4r5594)
Message-ID: <29D5FAF3-877F-4124-9EE6-564DBA77A9D0@dkutscher.net>
References: <7fe7b482-62c6-f998-e3de-034b0d7bcd90@iab.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_MailMate_3656300C-36C3-4979-A897-12EB9E6944C7_="
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Embedded-HTML: [{"HTML":[2260, 17156], "plain":[264, 4598], "uuid":"36E84334-6C89-4497-836A-CE71BE92866C"}]
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:/rmXjDQaloK+Db4CTtlUUlkYkiN0Kzh5qN+qX0UULqjAuFWf7AD PgLYhkMuc9Mlw9OQXUvptUXBl4irxgn5kCqnEOcBVGvhPnAhenngv6cF6AC/aOmcAmRY8rP FwfAMfozw/Ukrr8841m0qcwzAa+5RyT5ovniOJb3DAqilUD83Skmv+4DhWGxkDiHLSTXjHR OjD2lLRIft0DI1nkh8mLg==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:NvEKe6RXK0g=:ecZvnrrnQA5O1yMbiEw9Ie ruvcqblVcZLOrgP1N//7qoG2XVG9pOdIr3IBv8ssKeo3VW2m2dE8XyrFc/VmAo1AknhN7XtBK cEFrL0l2HOcDaAdU1XlKfbcuy684/s+bUrKickTD8QuTqCTSIhCJ5BZS8ayoxmuoVrvZrXtIs CFZfA7kfhUVAmpUAag25a0ALRLcgd6tD5lFmQgpZ7xE5FbggSgSoH9nZVxgn23zePVcn86pqO u3TcH5P0wOsie8fDhrJj2fK5Hi68zq70/W8m5fRzN81O/ytfLmuyu2XK/EK7Fl2Y0mHXcia0W Jqiy8Mu/0p6DuflQ/+tYEDveAsPVhA5lTpaRT9mjZjKhw2d367Ltyi1U2QV6chQyzrhE/PRw6 M6ePOHBxn/vT+t+JyeeyLw5VYIBVJWbHTKLaMyCR9bbz/+uJU8FYWkqDgBDvqcGr2N+Y/IUHT 0GHTB6lvF6BQPQu2Ed6Q9TBe6h9eSBQ9aBOGURrVNDyqSooGrtVIuy+VSoXIQs/S252k5u4pm hJ044UlwydsP+0urqeXLMdi+XSDGw47bq7A1oxfy30b4rRVkw19Ss2jweXxq3hG6dO8PLb8W4 PDw08oAdk1W5Q7KMG/cVm0IPAEHKSLNGsE3EC4DdO4SXE1yKHhXINCUoAbFZk/yPMT2CD2wz+ NLlGp/72zvb3Vdcr/ugZiHhHlGZzIQHM2S1nG5UgwqzgjXV2/5QpXAX/RlqjRiU0lAeztJxpM NDOMDyQr7aQjNDrWQ6sGhOE+08wPGowiOHDDzsYM3/0NAdcKlbgK3dPZC54=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/din/X8EN9EjtV53FL7VootEzAyrRejM>
Subject: [Din] Fwd: IAB Workshop Call for Papers: Design Expectations vs. Deployment Reality
X-BeenThere: din@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of distributed Internet Infrastructure approaches, aspects such as Service Federation, and underlying technologies" <din.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/din>, <mailto:din-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/din/>
List-Post: <mailto:din@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:din-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/din>, <mailto:din-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2019 13:41:10 -0000



Forwarded message:

> From: IAB Chair <iab-chair@iab.org>
> To: ietf@ietf.org, ietf-announce@ietf.org, execd@iab.org
> Subject: IAB Workshop Call for Papers: Design Expectations vs. 
> Deployment Reality
> Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2019 11:28:40 -0700
> Design Expectations vs. Deployment Reality in Protocol Development
> A number of protocols have presumed specific deployment models during 
> the development or early elaboration of the protocol.  Actual 
> deployments have sometimes run contrary to these early expectations 
> when economies of scale, DDoS resilience, market consolidation, or 
> other factors have come into play. These factors can result in the 
> deployed reality being highly concentrated.
> This is a serious issue for the Internet, as concentrated, centralized 
> deployment models present risks to user choice, privacy, and future 
> protocol evolution.
> On occasion, the differences to expectations were almost immediate, 
> but they also occur after a significant time has passed from the 
> protocol’s initial development.
> Examples include:
> Email standards, which presumed many providers running in a largely 
> uncoordinated fashion, but which has seen both significant market 
> consolidation and a need for coordination to defend against spam and 
> other attacks. The coordination and centralized defense mechanisms 
> scale better for large entities, which has fueled additional 
> consolidation.
> The DNS, which presumed deep hierarchies but has often been deployed 
> in large, flat zones, leading to the nameservers for those zones 
> becoming critical infrastructure. Future developments in DNS may see 
> concentration through the use of globally available common resolver 
> services, which evolve rapidly and can offer better security. 
> Paradoxically, concentration of these queries into few services 
> creates new security and privacy concerns.
> The Web, which is built on a fundamentally decentralized design, but 
> which is now often delivered with the aid of Content Delivery 
> Networks.  Their services provide scaling, distribution, and Denial 
> of Service prevention in ways that new entrants and smaller systems 
> operators would find difficult to replicate.  While truly small 
> services and truly large ones may operate using only their own 
> infrastructure, many others are left with the only practical choice 
> being the use of a globally available commercial service.
> Similar developments may happen with future technologies and services. 
> For instance, the growing use of Machine Learning technology presents 
> challenges for distributing effective implementation of a service 
> throughout a pool of many different providers.
> In RFC 5218 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5218>the IAB tackled what 
> made for a successful protocol.  In RFC 8170 
> <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8170>, the IAB described how to handle 
> protocol transitions.  This workshop will explore cases where the 
> initial system design assumptions turned out to be wrong, looking for 
> patterns in what caused those assumptions to fail (e.g., concentration 
> due to DDoS resilience) and in how those failures impact the security, 
> privacy, and manageability of the resulting deployments.
> While the eventual goals might include proposing common remediations 
> for specific cases of confounded protocol expectations, the IAB is 
> currently inviting papers which:
>  *
>    Describe specific cases where systems assumptions during protocol
>    development were confounded by later deployment conditions.
>  *
>    Survey a set of cases to identify common factors in these 
> confounded
>    expectations.
>  *
>    Explore remediations which foster user privacy, security and
>    provider diversity in the face of these changes.
> Important Dates
> The workshop will be held June 4-5 in Helsinki, Finland.
> Position papers must be submitted by May 3rd at the latest. The 
> program committee will review submitted position papers and send an 
> invitation to the workshop to one of the paper authors. Invitations 
> will be distributed by May 9 at the latest.
> Position Paper Requirements
> Interested parties must submit a brief document of one to four pages, 
> formatted as HTML, PDF, or plain text. We welcome papers that describe 
> existing work, answers to the questions listed above, new questions, 
> write-ups of deployment experience, lessons-learned from successful or 
> failed attempts, and ideally a vision towards taking deployment 
> considerations better in account when designing new Internet 
> technology. Re-submissions from work presented elsewhere are allowed.
> Program Committee
> The following persons are IAB contacts for this workshop:
> Jari Arkko
> Stephen Farrell
> Ted Hardie
> Christian Huitema
> Melinda Shore
> Brian Trammell
> Position papers should be sent by email to dedr-pc@iab.org.