wdiff rfc9707.original rfc9707.txt

Network Working Group

Internet Architecture Board (IAB) M. Kühlewind
Internet-Draft
Intended status:
Request for Comments: 9707
Category: Informational D. Dhody
Expires: 22 December 2024
ISSN: 2070-1721
M. Knodel
20 June
December 2024

IAB Barriers to Internet Access of Services (BIAS) Workshop Report
draft-iab-bias-workshop-report-02

Abstract

The "Barriers for to Internet Access of Services (BIAS)" workshop was
convened by the Internet Architecture Board (IAB) from January 15-17,
2024 as a three-day online meeting. Based on the submitted position
papers, the workshop covered three areas of interest: the role of
community networks
Community Networks in Internet Access of Services; Services, reports and
comments on the observed digital divide; divide, and measurements of
censorship and censorship circumvention. This report summarizes the
workshop's discussion discussions and serves as a reference for reports on the
current barriers to Internet Access.

Note that this document is a report on the proceedings of the
workshop. The views and positions documented in this report were
expressed during the workshop by participants and do not necessarily
reflect the IAB's views and positions.

About

Status of This Document Memo

This note document is to be removed before publishing as not an RFC.

The latest revision of this draft can be found at
https://intarchboard.github.io/draft-iab-bias-workshop-report/draft-
iab-bias-workshop-report.html. Status information for this document
may be found at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-iab-bias-
workshop-report/.

Source Internet Standards Track specification; it is
published for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at
https://github.com/intarchboard/draft-iab-bias-workshop-report.

Status of informational purposes.

This Memo

This Internet-Draft document is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

Internet-Drafts are working documents a product of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note Architecture Board (IAB)
and represents information that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list the IAB has deemed valuable to
provide for permanent record. It represents the consensus of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

Internet-Drafts the
Internet Architecture Board (IAB). Documents approved for
publication by the IAB are draft documents valid not candidates for a maximum any level of six months Internet
Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 7841.

Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
and how to provide feedback on it may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents obtained at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

This Internet-Draft will expire on 22 December 2024.
https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9707.

This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
license-info)
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1. About this workshop report content . . . . . . . . . . . 3 the Content of This Workshop Report
2. Workshop Scope and Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.1. Session 1: Community Networks - Their Role in Internet
Access of Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.1.1. The Quality of Community Networks . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.1.2. Strengthening Community Networks . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.1.3. Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.2. Session 2: Digital Divide - Reports and Comments . . . . 6
2.2.1. Disparities in service provision . . . . . . . . . . 6 Service Provisioning
2.2.2. Lack of consistent acceptance Consistent Acceptance of language scripts . . 7 Language Scripts
2.2.3. Web Affordability and Inclusiveness . . . . . . . . . 7
2.2.4. Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.3. Session 3: Censorship - Reports and Circumvention . . . . 8
2.3.1. Censorship Orders, Measurements, and Device Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.3.2. Use of VPNs for Censorship Circumvents and User
Expectations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.3.3. Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.4. Key Take Aways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Takeaways
3. IANA Considerations
4. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Appendix A. Position Papers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Appendix B. Workshop Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Appendix C. Workshop Program Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
IAB Members at the Time of Approval . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

1. Introduction

The Internet as part of the critical infrastructure affects many
aspects of our society significantly, although it impacts different
parts of society differently. The Internet is an important tool to
reach for
reaching the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) [SDG] (SDGs) listed in [SDGs]
and to for globally
support supporting human rights. Consequently, the lack of
meaningful access to digital infrastructure and services is also a
form of disenfranchisement.

Solely having Internet access is not enough. At the same time as we
work to connect the next billion people and reduce the digital
divide, it is also important to understand persistent and novel
inequalities in the digital age when accessing content and services.
There are more and more barriers to meaningful access to the services
and applications that run on the Internet. Even if Internet
connectivity is available, information and service access may remain
challenged and unequal.

This IAB workshop has aimed

* to

* collect reports about barriers to accessing content and services
on the Internet, e.g. e.g., based on filtering, and blocking as well as
due to general inequality of technological capabilities, like
device or protocol limitations.

* to help the Internet community get a better understanding of how the
Internet functions in different parts of the world and which
technology or techniques need to be used to gain access to
content.

* to build an understanding of what “being connected” "being connected" to the Internet
means: What is the Internet to users? What is needed to be
meaningfully connected? What are the minimum requirements to be
able to access certain parts of the content and services provided
over the Internet?

1.1. About this workshop report content the Content of This Workshop Report

This document is a report on the proceedings of the workshop. The
views and positions documented in this report are were expressed during
the workshop by participants and do not necessarily reflect the IAB's
views and positions.

Furthermore, the content of the report comes from presentations given
by workshop participants and notes taken during the discussions,
without interpretation or validation. Thus, the content of this
report follows the flow and dialogue of the workshop but does not
attempt to capture a consensus.

2. Workshop Scope and Discussion

The workshop was organized across three days with all-group
discussion slots, one per day. The following topic areas were
identified
identified, and the program committee organized paper submissions
into three main themes for each of the three discussion slots.
During each discussion, those papers were presented sequentially with
open discussion held at the end of each day.

2.1. Session 1: Community Networks - Their Role in Internet Access of
Services

The first day of the workshop focused on the role of Community
Networks [RFC7962] as a way to overcome the barriers to Internet
Access. Community Networks are self-organized networks wholly owned
by the community and thus provide an alternative mechanism to bring
connectivity and internet services to those places that lack
commercial interest.

Presentations ranged from highlighting the need for measuring Quality
of Experience (QoE) for Community Networks, to the potential role the
Content Delivery Network (CDN) can play in Community Networks, to the
role of Satellite Networks, and finally, to the vital role of the
spectrum in this space.

2.1.1. The Quality of Community Networks

[MARTINEZ] highlighted the need to address Quality of Experience
(QoE) QoE in discussions around
Community Networks. As a community-
driven community-driven deployment, the knowledge
and involvement of individuals can vary; therefore, there are no
guarantees of connectivity or quality of service. There is a need to
focus on user expectations and how they translate to measurable
performance indicators. Further, it asks for better documenting documentation of
best practices in deploying community
networks Community Networks as well as considering careful
thought regarding manageability considerations for
community networks Community Networks
in protocol development. [GUIFI] as an example Community Network was discussed
discussed, and some existing resources for Community Networks ([APC], [ISOC], and [TBB]) [APC]
[ISOC] [TBB] were shared by the participants.

The inconsistent quality and performance of Satellite Internet is result
in a connectivity gap for community networks Community Networks that rely on non-terrestrial non-
terrestrial networks (NTNs) for internet access [HU].

2.1.2. Strengthening Community Networks

[BENSON] focused on the prohibitive cost of the transit and Internet
service
services for Community Networks and argued for Content Delivery
Networks (CDNs) CDNs to provide
transit-like and Internet services services, at no more than at-cost at-cost, in a
mutually beneficial way. Community networks Networks still need backhaul to
and from the CDN’s CDN's point of presence presence, and models for community-backhaul community-
backhaul and open-source CDNs were highlighted. Discussion included [PANGEA] project
the status of Project PANGEA [PANGEA] as well as legal and commercial
considerations in related to such use of CDNs.

[HU] highlighted that Satellite Internet provided by advanced LEO low-
Earth orbit (LEO) satellite constellations can play a pivotal role in
closing the connectivity gap in the urban-rural digital divide via Satellite-
dependent community networks.
Satellite-dependent Community Networks. These existing known
performance and management gaps need focus to be focused on, to enable
Satellite Internet to resolve the divide. Further, research
directions such as multi-layer satellite networking, autonomous
maintenance, and integration between
Terrestrial and Non-Terrestrial terrestrial networks and NTNs
were suggested.

[RENNO] called attention to the coveted 6GHz 6 GHz (part of the C-band
with a desirable mix of coverage and capacity) as a prime choice for
International Mobile Telecommunication (IMT) for 5G technology while
it is in common unlicensed use in the community networks Community Networks (and small
ISPs). Spectrum allocations directly impact industries and market
access with ramifications for community networks. Community Networks. Further, there was
a discussion on the geopolitical tension tensions because of it.

2.1.3. Discussion

How can the technical community address the management gap gaps and
improve best practices for Community Networks? Is the increasing
complexity of the Internet making it more challenging to establish
secure connections, and should this be taken into account in the
design of the Internet? What steps need to be taken to make sure
Community Networks are secure? Should the manageability
consideration considerations
be expanded to explicitly consider Community Networks? The Global
Access to the Internet for All (GAIA) Research Group [GAIA] research group could be
a venue for further discussion and research. Further discussion
highlighted the need for readily available knowledge and tools for community networks
Community Networks as well as the tussle with market forces when
commercial networks compete with community networks. Community Networks. Also, there is
a lack of operational inputs from community network Community Network operators in the
IETF/IRTF.

2.2. Session 2: Digital Divide - Reports and Comments

Critical internet infrastructure affects many aspects of our society
significantly, although differently, the inequitable aspects of which
are typically referred to as "digital inclusion" signifying that in
efforts to digitalise digitalize society, there are those left out due to what
is typically called the "digital divide", a related term specific to
access to the Internet. These concepts together demonstrate that
even if Internet connectivity is available, for some there will
remain challenges towards achieving equality. This becomes
especially significant as governments view the Internet as an
important tool to help for helping them reach the Sustainable Development Goals
(SDG) [SDG] SDGs listed in [SDGs] and to
for globally support supporting human rights.

The second day of workshops was essential to understanding the nature
of the digital divide. Presentations of reports interrogated at
least three key aspects of the digital divide, though there it is
recognition
recognized that there may be more technical aspects of the digital
divide that were not present. Those were: were differences between
population demographics in the provision of online resources by
governments, inequality in the use of multilingualized domains and
email addresses, and increased costs for end-user downloads of
contemporary websites' sizes.

2.2.1. Disparities in service provision Service Provisioning

Ralph Holz presented research that exposes the more limited DNS-
mediated access to government websites by Indigenous communities in
Australia as compared to less disadvantaged users in the same
population in "Evidence for a digital divide? Measuring DNS
dependencies in the context of the Indigenous indigenous population of
Australia". [HOLZ]
Australia" [HOLZ]. DNS dependency trends were analysed analyzed between two
lists of domains serving Australian government sites for Indigenous
users and the general population. Researchers found, found "evidence that
dependencies for the Indigenous indigenous population are indeed differently
configured," indicative of a difference in service provisioning.
However
However, qualitative follow-up research is needed to interrogate both
the potential reasons for these differences and whether the
differences contribute to a "digital divide" digital divide that is tangible for
Indigenous users.

2.2.2. Lack of consistent acceptance Consistent Acceptance of language scripts Language Scripts

On the topic of availability of Internet services and content in
multiple languages languages, "Universal Acceptance of Domain Names and Email
Addresses: A Key to Digital Inclusion" was presented by Sarmad
Hussain of ICANN. [HUSSAIN] ICANN [HUSSAIN]. The ICANN community has increased the
options for multilingual identifiers through the expansion of the
Internet’s
Internet's DNS for use in domains and email addresses. However,
while the work of technical specification specifications and policy recommendations
is complete, much work remains to deploy a multiligualized multilingualized internet.
Today
Today, there are around 150 internationalised internationalized domain names (IDNs) (IDNs),
but
the barriers to equal rollout of these scripts at the domain level
are is hindered
primarily by software and applications that do not yet
recognise recognize
these new scripts. "Universal Acceptance" is a programme program of action for
the internet community at large that can ensure that IDNs are
accepted and treated consistently.

2.2.3. Web Affordability and Inclusiveness

In "A Framework for Improving Web Affordability and Inclusiveness" Inclusiveness",
Rumaisa Habib presented research on the connection between website
size and cost to end users. [HABIB] users [HABIB]. This critical inquiry presents
access in terms of affordability and through measurement demonstrates
that the material costs to end users who pay for their connection
based on the volume of data they download and upload have risen as
the complexity of the web Web grows. Their research provides a framework
for optimisation optimization based on end-user affordability. This framework is
anchored to in reality: it [HABIB] proposes a fairness metric and suggests
systematic adaptations to Web complexity of the Web based on "geographic
variations in mobile broadband prices and income levels."

2.2.4. Discussion

These three reports discuss very different aspects of current
inequalities in Internet access in various parts of the world:
service provision, provisioning, availability, and economic costs. Notably, the
reports discuss trends that exacerbate the digital divide beyond the
question of connectivity or whether users have access to the
Internet, potentially bringing yielding concrete ways that the IETF community
can address digital inclusion within its remit.

Discussants noted that while there are some interesting aspects to
the problem of the digital divide, such as measurements and
frameworks, most of the work is involves getting this work to the right
appropriate people at the policy layer so there level; therefore, it is an importance of communicating important to
communicate this technical evidence to the right appropriate people. The
IETF's role could be to build consensus on the proper solutions
presented to decision-makers that put research and measurement not
only in context but also in a consensus-driven solution space.
Another method to better communicate this research is by telling
stories of end users in more relatable and relevant terms, which terms; this is
often a challenge for at the technical level and a role for more diverse
stakeholders at the more local level.

2.3. Session 3: Censorship - Reports and Circumvention

This session focused on reports of censorship as observed during in recent
years in different parts of the world, as well as world; it also focused on the use
of of,
and expectation on expectations for, censorship circumvention tools, mainly the use
of secure VPN services.

The censorship reports, with a focus on Asia, and specifically India,
as well as Russia, as an example where censorship has changed
significantly recently, discussed the legal frameworks and court acts
actions that put legal obligations on regional network providers to
block traffic. Further, measurements to validate the blocking as
well as analyses of how blocking is implemented were discussed, i.e. i.e.,
which protocols are used but also which kind kinds of devices are used to
configure the blocking rules and where are they are deployed.

2.3.1. Censorship Orders, Measurements, and Device Analysis

[SAMSUDIN] reported on confirmed blocking from 10 countries
(Cambodia, Hong Kong (China), India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar,
Philippines, Thailand, Timor-Leste, and Vietnam) in the period from 1
July 2022 to 30 June 2023. The blocking was either confirmed by OONI Open
Observatory of Network Interference (OONI) measurements for existing
blocking fingerprints, heuristics, i.e. i.e., for new blocking
fingerprints as well as news reports of blocking orders, or user
experiences. Most of these countries block specific content such as
porn, gambling, or certain news pages. Interestingly Interestingly, the blocking
in Hong Kong and Myanmar is focused on the military and governmental
pages of foreign countries. Blocking is often realized by either DNS
tampering or HTTP tampering. For DNS, either a decided chosen IP address, a
bogon IP address (127.0.0.1), or an empty domain
(nxdomain) (NXDOMAIN) is used.
In the case of DNS tampering using a decided chosen IP address or HTTP tampering
tampering, some countries provide a block page that exposes the blocking,
blocking; however, more transparency about related to blocking is requested
by civil society organizations and the iMAP project. Internet Monitoring Action
Project (iMAP).

[GROVER] further focused the discussion on online censorship in
India, Pakistan, and Indonesia. In India, where providers are
responsible for implementing the blocking but no method is mandated,
the six major ISPs (covering 98.82% of all subscribers) were tested
on 4379 blocked websites (based on court orders, user reports, and
publicly available or leaked government orders) on DNS poisoning/
injection or HTTP/SNI-based censorship. Used The censorship techniques
used and websites blocked were different across ISPs. Multiple ISPs
used two different techniques (depending on the website), and all but
one provided censorship notices. Providers blocked between 1892 to and
3721 (of 4379) pages with only 1115 (27.64%) of pages (27.64%) blocked by all ISPs.
[Singh2020]
ISPs [Singh2020]. In contrast, in Pakistan, the government can also
order the IPSs ISPs to perform blocking blocking, and blocking has even been
observed in the past on at the IXP Internet Exchange Point (IXP) level.
Since 2020, there has also been a central Web Monitoring System
deployed at lines of international connectivity. In Indonesia,
initially, the government guided ISPs in how to perform the blocking.
The regulations were updated in 2020 to allow Indonesian ISPs to
block websites at their discretion. In 2022, there was a proposal by internet service providers
ISPs to
centralise centralize DNS. In Indonesia, a partial block list blocklist is
publicly available, but without any indication of why something is blocked.
[Grover2023]
blocked [Grover2023].

[BASSO] reported that for Russia a high large increase in additions to the
Roskomnadzor’s block list
Roskomnadzor's blocklist was observed in March 2022 as well as in
December 2022, foremost covering news pages but also covering human
rights organizations and social media, where more than 3500 blocking
orders were added to the list by an "Unknown body". Further,
blocking of domains that are not in the official Roskomnadzor’s list Roskomnadzor
blocklist has been observed as well.

An invited talk presented included a presentation of the work in [WANG] on
locating censorship devices by using HTTP and TLS traceroutes,
identifying device vendors through fingerprinting, and reverse-engineering reverse-
engineering censorship triggers by the use of fuzzing. E.g. for For example,
in the case of Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan, they showed that a
significant portion of measurements from remote countries are is blocked
at the endpoint, indicating local
policies policies, but showed that
connection resets are also happening in Belarus and Russia. Further,
they could identify a set of commercial network devices (with
filtering techniques such as firewalls) that are used in these
countries for censorship and show how fuzzing can be used to
fingerprint and cluster behaviours behaviors as well as potentially circumvent
the deployed methods.

All speakers called for more transparency by requiring blocking
messages as well as publication and auditing of blocklists.
Potentially
Potentially, even standardization could help.

2.3.2. Use of VPNs for Censorship Circumvents and User Expectations

Further on in the session, the possibility and prevalence of using
VPNs for circumvention has been discussed were discussed, including user expectations
and an analysis of security shortcomings of commercial VPN services.
The analysis presented in [RAMESH] has shown various problems that
lead to data leaks such as leakage of IPv6 traffic, non-browser
traffic, or tunnel failure, not upholding user expectations,
especially when used in authoritarian regimes for censorship
circumvention or private communication.

The question of how common the use of VPNs for circumvention is and
its legal implications, as VPNs are illegal in a few countries, has
been was
discussed. E.g. For example, VPNs are not officially banned in India India, but
VPN providers need to store log data and those, those who haven’t complied, haven't complied
stopped serving India. However, more data on VPN use and blocking
might be needed.

2.3.3. Discussion

After all, there is a cat-and-mouse game between censors and
circumvents,
circumvents; however, continued work on protocol enhancements that
protect user privacy is essential.

2.4. Key Take Aways Takeaways

Some key takeaways from the workshop are - as follows:

* There is a need for the technical community to address the
management gaps in operating Community Networks.

* Work should be done in documenting to document best practices for operating
Community Networks.

* During the development of protocols, explicit manageability
considerations related to Community Networks should be considered. carefully
thought out.

* Build consensus on solutions that have the most significant impact
in fostering digital inclusion. Further, promoting these
solutions ensures that efforts to bridge the digital divide are
effective and inclusive.

* Further work should be done to enhance protocols protocols, ensuring that
user privacy should
continue. is preserved.

* Develop further protocols (or extensions to existing protocols)
that enable more transparency on filtering filtering, and promote their use
and deployment.

* Develop new VPN-like services and potentially support measurements
to understand their deployment and use.

* Further discussion of these topics could happen in GAIA, HRPC,
PEARG, the GAIA
Research Group, the Human Rights Protocol Considerations (HRPC)
Research Group, the Privacy Enhancements and Assessments Research
Group (PEARG), and MAPRG the Measurement and Analysis for Protocols
Research Group (MAPRG), based on the relevance to the research group.
The management
Management-related and operations-related discussion discussions can be taken
to
OPSAWG. the IETF Operations and Management Area Working Group (OPSAWG).
The community could also explore if whether a group focused on
censorship (and its circumvention) focused group could be created.

3. IANA Considerations

This document has no IANA actions.

4. Informative References

[APC] "The Association for Progressive Communications (APC)",
n.d.,
<https://www.apc.org/>.

[BASSO] Basso, S., "How Internet censorship changed in Russia
during the 1st year of military conflict in Ukraine",
January 2024, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/
interim-2024-biasws-03/materials/slides-interim-2024-
biasws-03-sessa-online-censorship-in-india-pakistan-and-
indonesia-00>.
biasws-03-sessa-slide-how-internet-censorship-changed-in-
russia-during-the-1st-year-of-military-conflict-in-
ukraine-00.pdf>.

[BENSON] Benson, T. A. and M. Fayed, "A ‘C’ 'C' in CDN - CDN: Access service
to and from the Internet at cost for community networks",
January 2024, <https://www.ietf.org/slides/slides-biasws-
a-c-in-cdn-access-service-to-and-from-the-internet-at-
cost-for-community-networks-00.pdf>.

[GAIA] "Global Access to the Internet for All Research Group",
n.d., Group
(GAIA)", <https://www.irtf.org/gaia.html>.

[GROVER] Grover, G., "Online censorship in India, Pakistan and
Indonesia", January 2024,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/interim-2024-biasws-
03/materials/slides-interim-2024-biasws-03-sessa-online-
censorship-in-india-pakistan-and-indonesia-00>.

[Grover2023]
Grover, G. and C. Cath, G., "The infrastructure of censorship in Asia", in
"Eaten by the Internet", ed. Corinne Cath, pp. 75-81,
Internet Archive, Meatspace Press, October 2023,
<https://archive.org/details/eaten-by-the-internet/>.

[GUIFI] "Guifi.net", n.d., "guifi.net", <https://guifi.net/en>.

[HABIB] Habib, R., Tanveer, S., Inam, A., Ahmed, H., Ali, A.,
Uzmi, Z. A., Qazi, Z. A., and I. A. Ali, Qazi, "A Framework for
Improving Web Affordability and Inclusiveness", ACM
SIGCOMM '23, pp. 592-607, DOI 10.1145/3603269.3604872,
September 2023,
<https://www.ietf.org/slides/slides-biasws-a-framework-
for-improving-web-affordability-and-inclusiveness-00.pdf>. <https://www.ietf.org/slides/slides-
biasws-a-framework-for-improving-web-affordability-and-
inclusiveness-00.pdf>.

[HOLZ] Holz, R., Nazemi, N., Tavallaie, O., and A. Y. Zomaya,
"Evidence for a digital divide? Measuring DNS dependencies
in the context of the indigenous population of Australia",
2023, <https://www.ietf.org/slides/slides-biasws-evidence-
for-a-digital-divide-measuring-dns-dependencies-in-the-
context-of-the-indigenous-population-of-australia-00.pdf>.

[HU] Hu, P., "Closing the Performance and Management Gaps with
Satellite Internet - Internet: Challenges, Approaches, and Future
Directions", January 2024, <https://www.ietf.org/slides/
slides-biasws-closing-the-performance-and-management-gaps-
with-satellite-internet-challenges-approaches-and-future-
directions-01.pdf>.

[HUSSAIN] Hussain, S., "Universal Acceptance of Domain Names and
Email Addresses - Addresses: A Key to Digital Inclusion", 2023,
<https://www.ietf.org/slides/slides-biasws-universal-
acceptance-of-domain-names-and-email-addresses-a-key-to-
digital-inclusion-01.pdf>.

[ISOC] "Community Internet Society, "Connecting the Unconnected: Community
networks help bridge the connectivity gap",
n.d., <https://www.internetsociety.org/action-plan/
community-networks/>.
<https://www.internetsociety.org/action-plan/community-
networks/>.

[MARTINEZ] Martínez-Cervantes, L. M. and R. Guevara-Martínez,
"Community Networks and the Quest for Quality", January
2024, <https://www.ietf.org/slides/slides-biasws-
community-networks-and-the-quest-for-quality-00.pdf>.

[PANGEA] Cloudflare, "Project Pangea from Cloudflare", n.d., Pangea: Helping underserved
communities expand access to the Internet for free",
<https://www.cloudflare.com/en-gb/pangea/>.

[RAMESH] Ramesh, R., "Investigating the VPN Ecosystem through the
lens of Security, Privacy, and Usability", January 2024,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/interim-2024-biasws-
03/materials/slides-interim-2024-biasws-03-sessa-
investigating-the-vpn-ecosystem-through-the-lens-of-
security-privacy-and-usability-00>.

[RENNO] Rennó, R., "Maximising Connectivity - Connectivity: The Spectrum's Vital
Role in Technology Access", January 2024,
<https://www.ietf.org/slides/slides-biasws-position-paper-
by-raquel-renno-01.pdf>.

[RFC7962] Saldana, J., Ed., Arcia-Moret, A., Braem, B.,
Pietrosemoli, E., Sathiaseelan, A., and M. Zennaro,
"Alternative Network Deployments: Taxonomy,
Characterization, Technologies, and Architectures",
RFC 7962, DOI 10.17487/RFC7962, August 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7962>.
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7962>.

[SAMSUDIN] Samsudin, S., "iMAP (Internet Monitoring Action Project)
2023 Internet Censorship Report", January 2024,
<https://www.ietf.org/slides/slides-biasws-position-paper-
by-raquel-renno-01.pdf>.

[SDG] "Sustainable Development
<https://www.ietf.org/slides/slides-biasws-imap-internet-
monitoring-action-project-internet-censorship-report-
02.pdf>.

[SDGs] United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs -
Sustainable Development, "The 17 Goals", n.d.,
<https://sdgs.un.org/goals>.

[Singh2020]
Singh, K., Grover, G., and V. Bansal, "How India Censors
the Web", WebSci '20: Proceedings of the 12th ACM
Conference on Web Science, pp. 21-28,
DOI 10.1145/3394231.3397891, July 2020,
<https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3394231.3397891>.

[TBB] "Tribal Broadband Bootcamp", n.d.,
<https://tribalbroadbandbootcamp.org/>.

[WANG] Raman, R. S., Wang, M., Dalek, J., Mayer, J., and R.
Ensafi, "Network Measurement Methods for Locating and
Examining Censorship Devices", November 2023,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/interim-2024-biasws-
03/materials/slides-interim-2024-biasws-03-sessa-online-
censorship-in-india-pakistan-and-indonesia-00>.
03/materials/slides-interim-2024-biasws-03-sessa-network-
measurement-methods-for-locating-and-examining-censorship-
devices-00.pdf>.

Appendix A. Position Papers

Nineteen position papers were submitted to the workshop call for
papers. 11 Eleven were selected for publication. Papers that were not
published either (1) only provided a very prelimited analysis of an
idea that was felt to be incomprehensive for discussion at the workshop,
workshop or (2) addressed problems that were beyond the scope considered "beyond
scope" as dedicated for the workshop discussion e.g. discussion, e.g., discussing cyber security threads
cybersecurity threats as a barrier for to participation or implication of
technology in a regulation that imposes blocking. Both of these
topics pose a potentially severe risk on for the open Internet, Internet; however,
these risks might provide pose a high risk for all Internet users but do not
necessarily imply an unbalance.

All accepted papers are available at:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/biasws/materials/ at
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/biasws/materials/>.

This is the list of all published papers:

Community Networks:

* Martínez-Cervantes, L. M. Martínez-Cervantes, and R. Guevara-Martínez: Community
Networks and the Quest for Quality [MARTINEZ]

* T. Benson, T. A. and M. Fayed: A ‘C’ 'C' in CDN: Access service to and
from the Internet at cost for community networks at-cost [BENSON]

* P. Hu: Hu, P.: Closing the Performance and Management Gaps with Satellite
Internet: Challenges, Approaches, and Future Directions [HU]

* R. Rennó: Rennó, R.: Maximising Connectivity: The Spectrum's Vital Role in
Technology Access [RENNO]

Digital Divide:

* R. Holz, N. R., Nazemi, O. N., Tavallaie, A.Y. O., and A. Y. Zomaya: Evidence
for a digital divide? Measuring DNS dependencies in the context
of the indigenous population of Australia [HOLZ]

* S. Hussain: Hussain, S.: Universal Acceptance of Domain Names and Email
Addresses: A Key to Digital Inclusion [HUSSAIN]

* R. Habib, S. R., Tanveer, A. S., Inam, H. A., Ahmed, A. H., Ali, Z.A. A., Uzmi,
Z.A. Z. A.,
Qazi, I.A. Z. A., and I. A. Qazi: A Framework for Improving Web
Affordability and Inclusiveness [HABIB]

* J. Ott, G. J., Bartolomeo, M.M. G., Bese, R. M.M., Bose, M. R., Bosk, D. M., Guzman, L.
D., Kärkkäinen, M. L., Kosek, M., and N. Mohan: The Internet: Only
for the Fast (and Furious)?

* L.Y. Ohlsen: Ohlsen, L.Y.: BIAS workshop - M-Lab Position Paper submission

Censorship:

* S. Nurliza Samsudin: Samsudin, S.: iMAP (Internet Monitoring Action Project) 2023
Internet Censorship Report [SAMSUDIN]

* G. Grover: Grover, G.: The infrastructure of censorship in Asia [Grover2023]

* S. Basso: Basso, S.: How Internet censorship changed in Russia during the
1st year of military conflict in Ukraine [BASSO]

In addition to the submitted paper papers, two invited talks were presented included,
based on published papers:

* R. Sundara Raman, M. R. S., Wang, J. M., Dalek, J. J., Mayer, J., and R. Ensafi:
Network Measurement Methods for Locating and Examining Censorship
Devices [WANG]

* R. Ramesh, A. R., Vyas, A., and R. Ensafi: “All "All of them claim to be the
best”: A multi-perspective
best": Multi-perspective study of VPN users and VPN providers

Appendix B. Workshop Participants

The workshop participants were Arnaud Taddei, Carlos Pignataro,
Carsten Bormann, Cindy Morgan, Colin Perkins, Cory Myers, Dan Sexton,
David Guzman, David Millman, David Schinazi, Dhruv Dhody, Gurshabad
Grover, Hanna Kreitem, Jane Coffin, Jiankang Yao, Jörg Ott, Juan
Peirano, Lai Yi Ohlsen, Luis Martinez, Mallory Knodel, Marwan Fayed,
Matthew Bocci, Michael Welzl, Michuki Mwangi, Mirja Kühlewind, Mona
Wang, Peng Hu, Ralph Holz, Raquel Renno, Rennó, Reethika Ramesh, Rumaisa
Habib, Sarmad Hussain, Simone Basso, Siti Nurliza Samsudin, Suresh
Krishnan, Theophilus Benson, Tirumaleswar Reddy, Reddy.K, Tommy Pauly, Vesna
Manojlovic, and Wes Hardaker.

Appendix C. Workshop Program Committee

The workshop program committee members were Christopher Wood (IAB,
Cloudflare), Dhruv Dhody (IAB, Huawei), Mallory Knodel (IAB, Center
for Democracy and Technology), Mirja Kühlewind (IAB, Ericsson), and
Tommy Pauly (IAB, Apple).

IAB Members at the Time of Approval

Internet Architecture Board members at the time this document was
approved for publication were: TODO

Acknowledgments

Thanks to Arnaud Taddei for helpful suggestions to improve this
report.

Authors' Addresses

Mirja Kühlewind
Email: ietf@kuehlewind.net

Dhruv Dhody
Email: dd@dhruvdhody.com

Mallory Knodel
Email: mknodel@cdt.org