IP: Next Generation Area Directors: o Scott Bradner: sob@harvard.edu o Allison Mankin: mankin@cmf.nrl.navy.mil Area Summary reported by Scott Bradner/Harvard and Allison Mankin/NRL During the Toronto IETF meeting, one special IPng presentation was given and three IPng working groups, six BOFs and one open directorate meeting were held. On Monday morning the area directors made their IPng recommendation during the plenary session. Specific recommendations were made concerning the protocol design and the set of working groups which should be formed to take the documents to Proposed Standard status. The recommendation will be issued as an Internet-Draft for public comment. The IESG will review the recommendation after a Last Call period. IPng Directorate (NGDIR) The IPng Directorate held an open meeting Monday afternoon where a number of aspects of the IPng recommendation were discussed. A number of specific concerns were raised for the consideration of the directorate. Address Autoconfiguration BOF (ADDRCONF) A proposed charter for the proposed IPng Address Autoconfiguration Working Group was covered. The proposed address autoconfiguration protocol was then presented and discussed. Endpoint Identifier BOF (EID) An EID BOF was held to see if there was any consistent understanding of what an EID is. There was not. The BOF attendees agreed that there were about four different ideas about what an EID was or was used for. They agreed to do a series of write-ups to explain the different ideas. After that is done, it may be time to do further work to resolve the confusion. IPng Working Group BOF (IPNGWG) Two meetings were held of the IPNGWG BOF. The first one was held in conjunction with the open IPng Directorate (NGDIR) meeting. At the end of the directorate section the outline of the charter for the proposed IPng Working Group was presented and comments solicited. The second one was used to host a series of presentations addressing specific issues in the IPng recommendation. The presentations focused on the selection of the specific IPng address format, the advisability of tunneling, the requirement for header compression, the need to have packets larger than 64KB, mapping other types of address space into IPng, an ability to support many addresses per host, the constraints imposed by mobility and charging for addresses. Transition and Coexistence Including Testing BOF (TACIT) The first TACIT meeting was focused on trying to resolve the charter. The second meeting was focused on the short-term transition issues. Bob Gilligan gave a presentation on SST which will be the basis of the IPng transition plan and Dave Piscitello gave presentations on the TUBA dual-stack approach so that the working group would have a full understanding of the transition issues. Address Lifetime Expectations Working Group (ALE) In the ALE Working Group meeting the current projections of the lifetime of the IPv4 address space were reconfirmed but data presented indicated that there may be a reason to think that the projections are a bit optimistic. Simple Internet Protocol Plus Working Group (SIPP) The SIPP Working Group met twice. They discussed the IPng recommendation and its implications. The working group decided to conclude since its chairs indicated that they were going to resign at the end of the week. Steve Deering will co-chair the new IPng Working Group (with Ross Callon) and Bon Hinden will be acting as document editor. TCP/UDP Over CLNP-Addressed Networks Working Group (TUBA) The TUBA Working Group met to discuss the IPng recommendation and its impact of the TUBA effort. A number of options for the future of the working group were discussed. It was decided that the working group should go into hiatus until some of the documents in process are submitted as RFCs.