Ignacio Castro(RASPRG Chair)
Morgan Condie(IETF Secretariat)
Stephen Farrell(UFMRG Chair)
Mirja Kühlewind(MAPRG Chair)
Dirk Kutscher(IRTF Chair)
Dave Oran(ICNRG Chair)
Alvaro Retana(RASPRG Chair)
Eve Schooler(SUSTAIN Chair)
Lixia Zhang(DINRG Chair)
The minutes from February 25 have 2 OK’s, so they are approved.
(none)
Dirk Kutscher mentioned that this will be an ongoing process improvement. Have added weekly document status updates but we still need to speed up the review process for IRSG documents.
(none)
None
None
We sent out the notifications for IETF 126 and had 31 applicants. Four were grants which was the maximum we had in the budget. Used HotCRP and that worked relatively well. We would like to increase the number of reviewers per applicant from 3 to 4.
Suggestions included running the reviews in 2 quick rounds. If there is disagreement, run again. Opening the application for travel grants early for IETF 127 and giving partial funding like waiving the registration fee for a few grantees to help provide support for more applicants.
Dirk mentioned that this was done for a few applicants. If you would like for someone to attend who wouldn’t be able to attend otherwise, he has fee waivers he can grant. In those cases, let him know as soon as possible since he receives a lot of these requests.
Feedback on the overall process was that HotCRP was nice to use. Suggestions to encourage more women applicants by reaching out to the Systers mailing list and ACM/IEEE N2Women (Networking Networking Women) community. Discussion around making the process more similar to that of RIPE where applicants apply for the year vs the meeting so you can award and then budget the best way possible based on location. Relaxing the application rules to allow for masters students to apply in addition to early career academics and PhD students.
We will send out another email to ask for additional feedback and ideas on the travel grant process.
Slide 3
Eligibility
Artifacts delivered via an IRTF RG (RFC, draft, reference implementation, dataset)
Minimum age: 5–10 years (maybe 7?) to ensure downstream impact is observable
Evidence of influence: Standardization in IETF WGs, adoption in open-source stacks, commercial deployments, or research citations that translated into products/standards
Suggestion by Lixia Zhang that if you talk about the research impact, you should also count publications. Another suggestion about age, if test of time, the lower bound might be too low and won’t fit well but might not need the upper bound.
Discussion point raised by Dirk Kutscher, what do we think is a good minimum and maximum age?
Dave Oran suggested it takes 10 years to see if something stands the test of time. The number of candidates is a lot larger, I think like Lixia we should have a loose bound on the upper time.
Slide 13
Questions and Comments: Concrete Examples
Lars: It would be help me feel more confident about the idea if we could identify some concrete example of what we consider award-worthy, to have (1) some calibration and (2) some confidence that there is a pipeline of such work in the IRTF.
Dirk: RFCs
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc4838 (DTN Architecture)
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5050 (Bundle Protocol Spec.)
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7748 (Elliptic Curves for Security)
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc9180/ (Hybrid Public Key Encryption)
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5166 (Metrics for the Evaluation of Congestion Control Mechanisms – too far in the past, but just as an example)
Non-RFC Artifacts
https://github.com/delay-tolerant-networking/DTN2
Algorithm/protocol selection process in CFRG
DINRG’s workshop report on Internet centralization
Discussion around how you would choose the awardee? Would it be one person or a group of people.
Please continue this discussion on the mailing list.
Dirk Kutscher mentioned that really good conversation was had on this topic in Shenzhen. Feels confident in starting a group. Trying to find co-chairs for this activity. If you have ideas for good candidates, let him know.
Discussion around this side meeting and if it was really next generation.