Re: [Ippm-ioam-ix-dt] Design Team Virtual Meeting Summary - October 23, 2019

[Tal Mizrahi <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

We were considering to hold a virtual meeting before Singapore to discuss
open issues regarding the IOAM flags. However, some of the key people are
not available.
Therefore, we will not hold a virtual meeting before Singapore.

We will hold an IOAM side meeting on Thursday (of the IETF meeting week) at
8:30 (Orchard room).
A more detailed agenda will be published before the meeting.

Thanks,
Tal.

On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 10:06 AM Tal Mizrahi <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> IPPM IOAM Immediate Exporting Design Team
> Virtual meeting
> October 23rd, 2019, 06:00 UTC
> Webex meeting
>
> Attendees:
> Shwetha Bhandari, Frank Brockners, Barak Gafni, Tal Mizrahi, Ramesh
> Sivakolundu, Haoyu Song, Mickey Spiegel, Tianran Zhou.
>
> Minutes by Tal Mizrahi.
>
>
> Summary:
> ========
> - Will update the direct exporting presentation and upload an updated
> version.
> - We will try to hold another virtual meeting before IETF 106 to discuss
> open issues about draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-flags.
> - Will schedule an IOAM side meeting for IETF 106.
> - Due to DST changes, future virtual meetings will be held at 07:00 UTC.
>
>
> Direct exporting slides for IETF 106:
> =====================================
> - Tal presented preliminary slides for the IETF 106 IPPM meeting.
>
> https://github.com/inband-oam/ietf/blob/master/presentations/ippm-ioam-direct-exporting-ietf-106.pptx
> - Barak: on slide 3 - we talk about a collector. It might be multiple
> collectors.
> - Tal: right. We may need to fix the draft as well.
> - Frank: let's simplify by not mentioning the collector.
> - Tal: remove the collector from the figure?
> - Frank: right, we can just have an arrow pointing to the "sky".
> - Ramesh: right, talking about multiple collectors may raise the question
> about how you bind each node to a collector.
> - Frank: right, it would be best not to mention collecotors.
> - Tal: there is a question of whether we want to raise the open issue
> about the hop limit / hop count. There may be a very long discussion if we
> raise this open issue.
> - Frank: we mainly want slide 8 - asking for WG adoption. Then we can
> handle the open issue. We want to say that we took the WG input from the
> last meeting, and the WG can go ahead and adopt it.
> - Tal: are we fine with removing slides 6-7 about hop limit / hop count?
> - Frank: that would be best.
> - Barak: I agree. We can have additional side meetings to discuss the open
> issue further.
> - Tal: I am going to remove slides 6-7, 10.
> - Tal: any other comments about the presentation?
> - Barak: I have another comment about the draft. Will send it to the
> mailing list or github.
> - Frank: it would be best on the mailing list to stir up some discussion.
>
>
> IOAM side meeting in IETF 106
> =============================
> - Tal: should we schedule an IOAM side meeting?
> - Frank: that would be a good idea. The IPPM slot may be tight. About 0.5
> hour.
> - Tal: I will schedule a side meeting.
> - Frank: who will be in singapore?
> - Frank, Ramesh, Shwetha, Tal, Haoyu, Barak (not final yet).
>
>
> Flag draft
> ==========
> Tal: the flag draft was updated - removed the immediate export flag, and
> also some updates regarding the loopback flag, adding explanations and
> clarifications.
> Frank: we may want to further discuss this in a side meeting in singapore.
> It is for further discussion whether instructing data plane behavior is
> within the scope of this draft or not. The discussion about the flag draft
> requires participation of the people that raised their concerns.
> Tal: right.
> Frank: we can try to get these people to join the next virtual meeting.
> Tal: I will try to schedule a virtual meeting about the flag draft before
> Singapore, and invite the people who raised the open issues (Tom Herbert,
> Greg Mirsky).
> Mickey: a DST change is approaching - we may want to shift the time of the
> virtual meeting.
> Tal: may shift by an hour. Will send a notification.
>
>
> Other issues
> ============
> Frank: there is another open topic. Issue #135 on github - we can try to
> address it.
> Tal: do we need further discussion about this?
> Frank: no, we can suggest the text change. Basically to ignore unknown
> options or flags and remove them at the decapsulating node.
> Tal: sounds good.
> Frank: anything else that is open for the data draft?
> Tal: are we ready to request WG last call?
> Frank: with that last open issue closed, we definitely want to do ask for
> WG last call.
> Ramesh: draft 07 is the current version?
> Frank: yes.
>