Analysis of RFC 8890: Prioritizing the End User

Written by Mark Nottingham

The Internet Architecture Board (IAB) recently released RFC 8890, titled "The Internet is for End Users." This document serves as a guiding philosophy, asserting that the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) must base its technical determinations on the well-being of the actual people utilizing the network and take proactive measures to ensure those interests are met.

As both a member of the IAB and the author of this RFC, I want to elaborate on the reasoning behind this stance.

The Architecture of Internet Governance

The IETF is the primary engine behind the Internet's technical framework. Since the 1980s, it has been the central hub for documenting the specifications that allow the global network to function, overseeing the creation of fundamental protocols such as TCP, IP, DNS, and HTTP.

The IETF Philosophy

Unlike many regulatory bodies, the IETF operates on a unique social contract:

• Individual Participation: No government or corporation holds an official seat. Participants represent themselves, not their employers.
• Rough Consensus: Decisions are not reached via ballot boxes but through a process of finding the most technically sound solution based on community feedback.
• Meritocracy: The "best" solution is defined by the strength of the technical argument, not the size of the company supporting it.

The unofficial mantra of the organization is quite clear:

"We reject kings, presidents and voting. We believe in rough consensus and running code."

---

The Myth of Technical Neutrality

Historically, IETF members have viewed their work as purely technical—focusing on where bytes are placed or how a server responds to a client. Many believe that political concerns exist only at "Layer 8" (the human layer above the standard seven-layer OSI model) and should therefore be ignored.

However, the boundary between technical specifications and political outcomes is leaky.

Technical vs. Political Perspectives

As noted in the RFC:

"[T]he running code that results from our process (when things work well) inevitably has an impact beyond technical considerations, because the underlying decisions afford some uses while discouraging others."

Case Studies in "Political" Engineering

1. DNS-over-HTTPS (DoH): This created a clash between those wanting to protect dissidents/protestors and network operators who rely on DNS for management or child safety filtering.
2. Encrypted Client Hello (ECH): This closes a privacy gap in HTTPS. While technically superior for privacy, it has led to connections being blocked in countries like China.
3. HTTPS Intermediation: Proposals that would allow networks to decrypt HTTPS traffic for inspection.

If we assume a purely technical lens, we struggle to balance these conflicting human interests. When the IETF's decisions shift power in the real world, "running code" is no longer a sufficient justification.

---

Establishing a Principled Framework

To maintain legitimacy, the IETF cannot make decisions with political consequences while claiming they are only technical. If a decision feels arbitrary to the "loser" of a technical debate, the IETF loses credibility.

We can model the need for legitimacy as: $\text{Legitimacy} = \text{Principled Approach} + \text{Shared Values}$

The Roots of the Internet

The Internet was forged in a specific historical context—post-war America and Europe—and thus implicitly carries the values of that era:

• Reason
• Liberty
• Equality
• Rights and Property

The IETF's mission statement reinforces this:

"The IETF community wants the Internet to succeed because we believe that the existence of the Internet... will help us to build a better human society."

Current Objectives

To ensure the Internet remains a tool for empowerment, the IETF is now tasked with the following:

• Acknowledge that technical decisions have political impacts.
• Ground decision-making in the interests of end users.
• Develop a consistent set of principles to navigate "non-technical" conflicts.

Implementation Logic

In a pseudo-code sense, the IETF's decision-making logic is evolving:

def evaluate_proposal(proposal):
    if proposal.has_technical_merit():
        if proposal.benefits_end_users():
            return "APPROVE"
        else:
            return "REVISE_FOR_USER_INTEREST"
    return "REJECT"

By embracing these principles, the IETF ensures that the Internet remains an open platform where users are not merely subjects of the network, but the primary beneficiaries of its design.