Skip to main content
  • IETF 118 post-meeting survey

    IETF 118 Prague was held 4-10 November 2023 and the results of the post-meeting survey are now available on a web-based interactive dashboard.

    • Jay DaleyIETF Executive Director
    30 Nov 2023
  • Net zero update for 2023

    An update on the IETF’s carbon footprint over the past year and efforts going forward to increase the sustainability of how the IETF operates.

    • Greg WoodIETF LLC Director of Communications and Operations
    • Stephanie McCammonDirector of Meetings and Sponsorships, IETF Secretariat
    29 Nov 2023
  • IETF 118 Highlights

    The IETF 118 meeting was held in Prague in early November. In general, the meeting was productive and full of lively discussions fueled by 1067 onsite participants, and 1806 participants altogether.

    • Christopher A. WoodIAB Member
    28 Nov 2023
  • Cisco to host IETF 121 Dublin meeting

    I am pleased to announce that Cisco will be the Host for IETF 121 Dublin, 2-8 November 2024.

    • Jay DaleyIETF Executive Director
    6 Nov 2023
  • Suggested IETF 118 Sessions for Getting Familiar with New Topics

    These IETF 118 meeting sessions included discussions and proposals that are accessible to a broad range of Internet technologists whether they are new to the IETF or long-time participants.

      4 Nov 2023

    Filter by topic and date

    Filter by topic and date

    Long-Term IETF Evolution

    • Jari ArkkoIETF Chair

    12 Jun 2016

    In the midst of a day’s discussion about particular issue that troubles us with technology or something else, it can be difficult to focus on topics that have a longer timescale. As you probably remember, I had asked a design team to write a draft about various trends around us that affect the IETF.

    We got some feedback on that draft, but the draft stopped short of making specific statements about what the IETF should do. And unless we bring the thoughts to a bit more practical level, the discussion stays abstract and remote.

    So, I thought I’d try to state my view about what we should focus on in the future, in the hopes that it will generate discussion. Feel free to suggest alternate views or question these!

    I claim that we need to do four major things:

      1. Make it easier for people to be involved in the IETF.
      2. Be even better positioned to use online collaboration.
      3. Focus on linking open standards to code, operationals, and interoperability.
      4. Evolve IETF sponsorship models to focus more on our work than meetings.

    The first two items are about improved ability to people be involved in IETF work in different ways, and at low cost level. We need open an source developer to come collaborate on a standard for the duration of his or her project, without requiring a multi-year learning project to do it. We need people with too little time on their hands or too little travel funds to be able to participate more fully in the virtual IETF. This requires some practical changes, such as evolving our tools. But it will also require cultural and maybe process changes, if we are to enable, for instance, people with experience but not much IETF experience to be able to drive things more fully.

    We have also been searching for our place in the world of many different forms of collaboration. Standards vs. open source, for instance. I think a natural place for the IETF to sit in is in the borderline between code and standard; hence hackathons, interops, and operational experience need to form an even bigger part of our gatherings than they are today.

    Finally, as you know the IETF operations are funded from three sources: The Internet Society, meeting fees from our participants, and sponsorships. I’ll note that two thirds of that is tied to meetings, and re-balancing that differently is probably prudent. For instance, the sponsorship part could perhaps move from current meeting host model to other models that are more based on the work that we do. This wouldn’t be a change to who our funders are or how much financing is needed, but rather a change of the format.

    But these are just my initial thoughts. Please discuss! The best place for discussing this on the IETF main discussion list, ietf@ietf.org.

    Jari Arkko, IETF Chair


    Share this page