From nobody Wed Nov 9 13:48:12 2022 Return-Path: X-Original-To: din@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: din@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14EA7C1522D2 for ; Wed, 9 Nov 2022 13:48:10 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -7.007 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.007 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=cs.ucla.edu Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QypU-Nul2VbY for ; Wed, 9 Nov 2022 13:48:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.cs.ucla.edu (mail.cs.ucla.edu [131.179.128.66]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3874FC1522CD for ; Wed, 9 Nov 2022 13:48:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB0973C01FA28; Wed, 9 Nov 2022 13:48:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id K1NWMY1pZe_m; Wed, 9 Nov 2022 13:48:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 596B53C020F4E; Wed, 9 Nov 2022 13:48:05 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 mail.cs.ucla.edu 596B53C020F4E DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cs.ucla.edu; s=9D0B346E-2AEB-11ED-9476-E14B719DCE6C; t=1668030485; bh=3ZlLC3r1SKkr7tdfrQEuMLSTUhVwGbJCrp8wpVx0g9A=; h=Mime-Version:From:Date:Message-Id:To; b=j+dmyNK9WQyviCesrE4PNibfVaewxBHPyaFU98kPAzSIft5gRiu8X9/GP3j7P2MrO tmM4Wt0wa4eR9iFD/XURoPXzhefP/tWceXG/7BcEpOE/WLtWX7cyBwBHQ0C+sT5xm8 V3xxW/x0Slk9B3bq9z1q/wZFDupi8FxVH6xu7f/hJ1fkJE/t5hd61iWRJndCSfrfEG QWhVeo9JAHJ8guY729zO6tLiTqdzfIzNpMDY3BSVTUtE8A6bevXYhVIyZD8w53m/as 0JV81/x0Szj62DeqsfXk6jBWHWRO+PFWcdf5zlQhGDXyoN1yHgTMmqGkMZ6AcYcDrF T+OgXCcOORzrw== X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mail.cs.ucla.edu Received: from mail.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id NFmPH3HrJ9fJ; Wed, 9 Nov 2022 13:48:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtpclient.apple (dhcp-931c.meeting.ietf.org [31.133.147.28]) by mail.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CEF453C01FA28; Wed, 9 Nov 2022 13:48:04 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.120.41.1.1\)) From: Lixia Zhang In-Reply-To: <20221109085146.GA17957@openfortress.nl> Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2022 13:48:02 -0800 Cc: din@irtf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20221108082215.GA14862@openfortress.nl> <54BFCEE1-C2C7-47D6-B6DF-A16ED702814F@cs.ucla.edu> <20221109085146.GA17957@openfortress.nl> To: Rick van Rein X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3696.120.41.1.1) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Din] DINRG side meeting on Wednesday X-BeenThere: din@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of distributed Internet Infrastructure approaches, aspects such as Service Federation, and underlying technologies" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2022 21:48:10 -0000 Hi Rick, thanks for your useful input. some quick comments below 1/ regarding the suggestion of splitting to multiple groups: my view is = that DIN RG should serve as the focal point for the decentralization = efforts, help collect/organize information and ongoing efforts by the = broader community. =20 The amount of work is beyond daunting. Nevertheless, we must take a step = forward, no matter how long the journey may be. 2/ regarding the relation to IETF WGs: all working groups decide their = own missions. Similarly, DIN RG decides its own: work with the community = to gain a deeper understanding of the problem and solution spaces, and = to share our understanding with the community. just my own 2 cents,=20 Lixia > On Nov 9, 2022, at 12:51 AM, Rick van Rein = wrote: >=20 > Hi Lixia, >=20 >> DINRG side meeting is scheduled for 10:30-11:30AM tomorrow, in = Room Richmond 6 (indicated in slide 7 of opening slides). It's located = on West Wing, first floor. >=20 > Thanks. I have something overlapping that I'm afraid. Yesterday > I posted something on Zulu that represents my balanced view: >=20 > 1. A split into an overview group and technical group could be > useful, be it in different RG or in time; >=20 > 2. I do feel a need for a place to overview technology that spans > multiple IETF WGs, because they have a singular focus and our > work clearly taught us that several small changes are needed > in several places; we need a place where this overview can be > discussed, and turned into a statement towards IETF WGs. >=20 > I hope this is useful input for your discussion. Good luck! >=20 >=20 >> 2022-11-08, 10:32 >>=20 >> @George @Britta I also noticed the difference between big-picture and = tech and a split would manage expectations for the two kinds of = meetings. The reason I came to IRTF is in the hope to find a place to = discuss the technical big-picture, which still is very technical, but it = scatters over many IETF WGs that it is difficult to achieve = decentralisation there alone. As in, proposals in an IETF WG touch upon = so much more than the WG focus that it is asking a lot to take that all = in. At least our work has been looking for a big idea and then wanted to = find the smallest possible changes to get it running most everywhere, = and that kind of overview can easily get broad and inquisitive, so more = IRTF-alike than IETF-alike, even if it is highly technical. (IMHO) >=20 >=20 > Cheers, > -Rick