Internet Emergency Preparedness WG (ieprep) Agenda

1
Internet Emergency Preparedness WG (ieprep) Agenda

• Monday, August 1, 0900-1000
• Chair(s)
• Scott Bradner ltsob_at_harvard.edugt
• Kimberly King ltkimberly.s.king_at_saic.comgt
• AGENDA
• 5 minutes agenda bashing
• 25 minutes ieprep re-charter discussion
• 15 minutes Antonio DeSimone DoD Requirements on
  Priority and Preemption
• 15 minutes An Nguyen NCS Requirements
• 60 minutes total

2
ieprep

• Re-charter?

3
Proposed Charter (1)

• Effective telecommunications capabilities are
  imperative to
• facilitate immediate recovery operations for
  serious
• disaster events including natural disasters
  (e.g.,
• hurricanes, floods, earthquakes) and those
  created by man
• (e.g., terrorist attacks, combat situations or
  wartime
• events). In addition, related capabilities
  should be usable
• in normal command and control operations of
  military
• services, which often have timeliness
  requirements even in
• peacetime. The IEPREP WG will address proactive
  and
• reactive robustness and recovery from various
  outages using
• three perspectives
• 1. A commercial (i.e., or public)
  telecommunications
• infrastructure
• 2. A governmental/military telecommunications
  infrastructure
• that may retains sole ownership and
  administration of its
• own resources
• 3. A governmental/military telecommunications
  infrastructure
• that combines private resources and leverages
  public
• infrastructure. This scenario may be subject to
  local

4
Proposed Charter (2)

• Disasters can happen any time, any place,
  unexpectedly.
• Quick response for recovery operations requires
  immediate
• access to any public telecommunications
  capabilities at
• hand. These capabilities include conventional
  telephone,
• cellular phones, and Internet access via online
  terminals,
• IP telephones, and wireless PDAs. The commercial
• telecommunications infrastructure is rapidly
  evolving to
• Internet-based technology. Therefore, the
  Internet
• community needs to consider how it can best
  support
• emergency management and recovery operations.
• Potential disasters for governmental/military
• infrastructures can extend beyond what might be
  experienced
• by the commercial/public sector and can be
  anticipated to
• some degree. Thus, proactive mechanisms to
  address would-be
• outages are required for these scenarios.
• The IEPREP WG will work on these three
  perspectives
• (commercial, governmental/military, and the
  combination) and
• synergize common mechanisms and requirements into
  other
• groups where possible, while maintaining a
  separate track of

5
Proposed Charter (3)

• Now that the initial documents describe the broad
  problem
• space and its salient characteristics, new
  efforts will
• focus on specific requirements and solutions such
  as those
• pertaining to the governmental/military sector.
  One
• document exists in the Transport Area working
  group of
• interest to IEPREP that could satisfy a
  governmental
• framework/BCP is draft-ietf-tsvwg-mlpp-that-works-
  XX. This
• document will progress to completion in that WG,
  yet be the
• basis of more work in this IEPREP WG. Some
  additional
• efforts on the governmental/military track within
  IEPREP
• will focus on this TSVWG document, analyze gaps,
  and provide
• input where needed.
• The following are four specific examples that can
  satisfy
• the interests of governmental/military (and
  potentially,
• commercial/public) emergency communications

6
Proposed Charter (4)

• 1. Conveying information about the priority of
  specific
• flows (or sessions) that originate in a VoIP
  environment.
• This could include a requirements effort to
  describe
• extensions to NSIS or RSVP. Requirements for NSIS
  would be
• forwarded to the NSIS working group. Requirements
  for RSVP
• could be forwarded to tsvwg or worked on in
  IEPREP.
• 2. Nested VPNs require special considerations for
  routing
• and QoS if nodes in the path that make these
  decisions
• generally have limited information.
• 3. Some countries require civil networks to
  preempt sessions
• under state circumstances, and preemption is
  considered an
• absolute requirement in governmental networks in
  most
• countries. Unless implementation of these
  requirements can
• be objectively shown to threaten network health
  (via
• simulation or in operations), then the
  requirement needs to
• be considered by IEPREP and specific solutions
  must be
• developed.
• 4. Non-real-time applications require measures of
  QoS and
• other preferential treatments, as voice will not
  be the only

7
Proposed Charter (6)

• In the IETF, considerations for treatment and
  security of
• emergency communications stretch across a number
  of Areas
• and Working Groups, notably including the various
  telephony
• signaling working groups, Protocol for carrying
• Authentication for Network Access (pana), the
  open Transport
• Area for path-coupled signaling and various
  operational
• groups. IEPREP will cooperate closely with these
  groups and
• with those outside of the IETF such as various
  ITU-T study
• groups.
• If there is an existing WG that can discuss the
  requirements
• for extending their protocol or mechanism, IEPREP
  will
• generate only a requirements document for that
  group to
• discuss.
• If there is not an existing WG that can discuss
  the
• requirements for extending their protocol or
  mechanism,
• IEPREP will prepare requirements and discuss the
  extension
• of that protocol/mechanism or protocols/mechanisms
  within
• IEPREP.

8
Goals and Milestones (Proposed)

• Done Submit initial I-D of Framework
• Done Submit initial I-D of Recommendations BCP
• Done Submit Requirements I-D to IESG for
  publication as an
• Informational RFC
• Done Submit Framework I-D to IESG for
  publication as an
• Informational RFC
• Dec 03 Submit Recommendations I-D to IESG for
  publication as
• a BCP
• Oct 05 Submit an initial I-D of Emergency Threats
  Analysis
• of Government/Military Networks
• Dec 05 Submit an initial I-D of Differences
  between GETS and
• MLPP Networks
• Feb 06 Submit an initial I-D of Requirements of
  Government/Military Networks

9
Goals and Milestones (Proposed)

• Mar 06 Submit an initial I-D of Considerations
  for potential
• solutions of Government/Military Networks
• Apr 06 Submit an initial I-D of Mechanisms to be
  used by
• Government/Military Networks
• Oct 05 Submit final I-D of Emergency Threats
  Analysis of
• Government/Military Networks to IESG as
  Informational
• RFC
• Feb 06 Submit final I-D of Requirements of
• Government/Military Networks to IESG as
  Informational RFC
• Apr 06 Submit final I-D of Mechanisms to be used
  by
• Government/Military Networks to IESG as
  BCP RFC
• The working group will discuss re-chartering if
  additional
• efforts are agreed upon by the WG (for example,
  work items
• related to protocols outside existing WGs).

10
Comments

• Interest in re-chartering working group?