IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ippm] Draft agenda for IETF 104

Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com> Tue, 12 March 2019 18:13 UTC

Return-Path: <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFC6B1277E7 for <ippm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Mar 2019 11:13:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SRNtjsn0LiIw for <ippm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Mar 2019 11:13:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x232.google.com (mail-lj1-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BCD721200B3 for <ippm@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Mar 2019 11:13:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x232.google.com with SMTP id a17so3194616ljd.4 for <ippm@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Mar 2019 11:13:08 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=4bq+PZ4A5yv+BOB9k2JbF++ZbB+dYGGNisRqs4tOZlI=; b=SOkkFLmqaxaDDsNDxZ05Oqy3S7TnT52rBzoppxyOpiWuqjS+5jmbo43dOQO4tp6VRe KFhdOaM2CQl6XCB9+CODT+/2Wtxr2TX9h89x7M47x8qirjCV5SUMdSgaSElC95yGY722 sA8oNwMZbPgwV2F+y2RKCKy8bR4TSvI+FrunMnJL8vBgnMOmDkgxjoSi6UXBZTvKD2/S /G2sofQ8P4SmXB4KWYZJkwEhlDzp34yEE5U727Rp1DbTGi64KrfcwTPFE3a1eEhqFkF9 DnmluF8PNfPsaRm1pMnd4WSxhQx3vO4Z8dQI2EX0lFEuywyxeOPuxnBLONX5InQgC+oO dLmg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=4bq+PZ4A5yv+BOB9k2JbF++ZbB+dYGGNisRqs4tOZlI=; b=tFTrQghntcTnFBXob0r9EsWlodx2SVXehQ4fBJzM6b2wnPAM/WcuJnR+rsocAfIPTx 0QXfS0xCdJTSBNofXxymLdRb26w5bha9J0acz9estDQAkrdC9Ha9x6bq6EM6RSdGzBDu lXNtjUkMTFKndxXEpvbPQC33bBrTaIp54/9C+2MY9uKzFVOc1mKr+zSZceosQtRx5vrY XvrYUT0Qw9ykBYgNuN7FTUxhsNWgea2AKCnawddTGrfar5DzhE2RHnupPoalneofmq93 CvLu7QDdzls2iKwxKIRwTC5ONwNcusbYj5cuNbSsbVz+B3rLxU7m1RROlpNQpvNr2UKw hLCQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVYtWzOHf6B3PKkMRUg62T2TerWLhtQiGI2JhyRRduoeeOVPmhe tDYUQ2FqydXLQfQ9RpbKIRnbQG3CPo8Arx4BrvZkmw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqztNL3DtyFX7+WV+8awlpVncJG/H9BH1MiaC/E0bk/DvKzolJKf4ulOueQZTEJIZ3aJkChjWvuKFRHwYD1Oxew=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:2e05:: with SMTP id u5mr20829157lju.85.1552414386722; Tue, 12 Mar 2019 11:13:06 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <F2ABDB31-380C-43B1-9B3D-BB5C5E309DD8@apple.com>
In-Reply-To: <F2ABDB31-380C-43B1-9B3D-BB5C5E309DD8@apple.com>
From: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2019 11:12:55 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+RyBmWS58i3qNgit1P9YZSZn5Op+J4+caWGe8kORJpwXJb-fA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tommy Pauly <tpauly=40apple.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: IETF IPPM WG <ippm@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000109b570583e9a453"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ippm/y4kqqcHqO0TbGF1cXKL4uemOvsk>
Subject: Re: [ippm] Draft agenda for IETF 104
X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group <ippm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ippm>, <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ippm/>
List-Post: <mailto:ippm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm>, <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2019 18:13:11 -0000

Hi Tommy,
given how dense is our agenda for Prague, allotting 40 minutes for one
draft seems as overgenerous. If there are updates to IOAM individual
drafts, then should these be explicitly listed among other individual
drafts that have allocated 5 minutes each?

Kind regards,
Greg

On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 10:35 AM Tommy Pauly <tpauly=
40apple.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:

> Hello IPPM,
>
> We've posted our draft agent for IETF 104 here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/104/materials/agenda-104-ippm-00
>
> We have a two-hour slot, and are pretty full! The chairs have discussed
> and would like to have two more extended discussions this time about:
> - Finalizing the metrics and initial registries, so we can get those out
> the door
> - How we should progress with IOAM and the large cluster of related
> documents. We'll ask that instead of having any lightning talks on related
> IOAM documents, we have a broader discussion about what we're doing for
> these.
>
> After that, the agenda is made up of 5 minute lightning talks, with a
> group of related alt-mark documents at the start. Apologies that we can't
> have longer time for these!
>
> Suggestions or bashing welcome!
>
> Best,
> Tommy
>
> _______________________________________________
> ippm mailing list
> ippm@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email