[CCAMP] Raw minutes

[Lou Berger <[e-mail]>]

All,
	The enclosed are the raw minutes from today -- they are quite rough!
Please feel free to make changes you feel are appropriate to the
etherpad at http://tools.ietf.org/wg/ccamp/minutes (note, past revisions
are saved and final minutes will be reviewed.)

All input will be greatly appreciated!

Lou (and Deborah)

=================================

These are also available from the materials page:
>
>     0 - Combined with 1
>     1 - Agenda, Admin & WG Document Status
>     2 - draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-signaling
>     3 - draft-farrel-interconnected-te-info-exchange
>     4 - draft-dios-ccamp-control-models-customer-provider
>     5 - draft-ietf-ccamp-lsp-diversity
>     6 - draft-ietf-ccamp-rsvp-te-srlg-collect
>     7 - draft-beeram-ccamp-network-assigned-upstream-label
>     8 - Moving the overlay discussion forward
>     9 - draft-long-ccamp-rsvp-te-availability &
draft-long-ccamp-ospf-availability-extension
>     10 - draft-li-ccamp-role-based-automesh
>     11 - draft-martinelli-ccamp-wson-iv-info
>     12 - draft-dharinigert-ccamp-g-698-2-lmp
>     13 - draft-galikunze-ccamp-g-698-2-snmp-mib
>     14 - draft-zhang-ccamp-rsvpte-ber-measure
>     15 - draft-zhang-ccamp-gmpls-resource-sharing-proc
>     16 - draft-gandhi-ccamp-gmpls-restoration-lsp
>     17 - draft-ali-ccamp-otn-signal-type-subregistry
>     18 - draft-ali-ccamp-additional-signal-type-g709v3
>
>     Session 2014-07-21 1520-1650: Tudor 7/8 - Audio stream - ccamp
chatroom
>     Session 2014-07-23 0900-1130: Territories - Audio stream - ccamp
chatroom
>
> Agenda
>                                         CCAMP Agenda For IETF 90
>                                         Version:
>
>                                         First Session
>                                         MONDAY, July 21, 2014
>                                         1520-1650 Monday Afternoon
Session II
>                                         Room: Tudor 7/8 (MM)


> Presentation                 Start Time         Duration
Information
> 0                   15:20         10         Title:
Administrivia & WG Status
> Draft:

No Agenda changes.

>                                 Presenter:         Chairs
> 1                   15:30         10         Title:         WG
Document Status
> Draft:
> Presenter:

- TE Metric Recording & SRLG Collection I-D
Matthew: Code points documented have already been allocated by IANA for
other I-Ds.
Lou: More inclined to request they do not have early allocation and
follow the IANA process
Oscar: (as author) we already requested an early allocation.
Lou: Lets discuss this issue during your presentation.


Re: WG I-Ds not currently on agenda - What are the authors intentions?
Rakesh Gandhi: Two months since the comments were made, but I have been
in PTO, I will look to address them in the next few weeks.
George: I need to synch with Zafar
Lou: Please get with Zafar and ask him to provide an update to the list
on when the draft might be updated


> 2                   15:40         10         Title:         Post LC
WSON Document Changes
> Draft:         http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-signaling
> Presenter:         Young Lee


Lou: Implementors please review the document for changes.  Are there
volunteers willing to commit to a review by the end of August - 3
(including Authors.)  I have some technical comments on the error
processing and will send them to the list

> 3                   15:50         10         Title:         Problem
Statement and Architecture for Information Exchange Between
Interconnected Traffic Engineered Networks
> Draft:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-farrel-interconnected-te-info-exchange
> Presenter:         TBD

George: Server layer or control entity would control paths are created
from the server layer.
Igor: it may be dependent on time/day, the client may want to change
(demand?)
Oscar: Document is already 40 pages, might be worth splitting the
document, maybe seperating terminology?
Adrian: Inclusion of terminology was a request from chairs.
Lou:   I had made a request for seperate documents, but it seems this
has not resonated with the authors. One or two documents is secondary,
what is most important is to have terminology documented in one place.
Adrian:
Igor: Agree that it should be located in a single place.

[Poll]
How may read the document [Result]
How many would support [Result]
Who has reservations regarding the document [Result]
We will take to the list.
> 4                   16:00         10         Title:
Terminology and Models for Control of Traffic Engineered Networks with
Provider-Customer Relationship
> Draft:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dios-ccamp-control-models-customer-provider
> Presenter:         Oscar Gonzalez De Dios

Fatai: The I-D list terminology/defintions but it does not prescribe
which terms to use.
Oscar: We compiled the terms, but it is up to the WG to decide which
terms to use, something to discssion on the list.
George: Historical purposes, re: the OIF UNI, was built around a
commercial relationship between user and the network. We then stripped
down the defintion to the essentials.
Deborah: Do not spend too much effort/involved with terminology, we will
clean up in the near future.
Lou: Are there any portions of the document that could not be merged
with TE interconnection I-D.
Oscar: No reason why the document could noy be merged, the only
reservation would be on the size of the document.
George: A reason for having a terminology section in TE interconnection
document is that terms have become fuzzy and may be used differently.
Oscar's document brings some precision to the dicussion.
Lou: Ok, I see the motivation for ... In summary, lets keep the document
seperate but review the TE interconnec and see whats missing and report
to the list.
Oscar:



> 5                   16:10         10         Title:         Resource
ReserVation Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) Path Diversity using
Exclude Route
> Draft:         http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-lsp-diversity
> Presenter:         Zafar Ali/George Swallow

Lou: Three methods defined in I-D do you expect an implementation to
supprot all three?
George: (Yes?) Scenario specific, it depends on the use.
Infinera: Proposal uses crankback?
George: as a means for last resort, but not preferred.
Gert:
George:
Lou: New requirements in I-D, that seem to conflict with your description.
George:


> 6                   16:20         10         Title:         RSVP-TE
Extensions for Collecting SRLG Information
> Draft:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-rsvp-te-srlg-collect
> Presenter:         Oscar Gonzalez de Dios




> 7                   16:30         10         Title:         Network
Assigned Upstream Label
> Draft:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-beeram-ccamp-network-assigned-upstream-label
> Presenter:         Vishnu Pavan Beeram



> 8                   16:40         10         Title:         Moving the
overlay discussion forward
> Draft:
> Presenter: