Tuesday, July 21, 2015< ^ >
Room Configuration
Room Occupants

[15:23:53] Meetecho joins the room
[15:41:15] Daniel King joins the room
[15:41:42] joel jaeggli joins the room
[15:42:14] Carlos Pignataro joins the room
[15:42:20] joel jaeggli has set the subject to: lime IETF 93
[15:43:01] adrianfarrel joins the room
[15:43:31] <adrianfarrel> Hi, I'm jabber scribe. Is anyone remote? Doesn't look it to me
[15:44:51] <adrianfarrel> Charter summary/refresh from chairs
[15:45:49] <adrianfarrel> Carlos notes the milestones and those marked red
[15:47:18] <adrianfarrel> Qin notes Tom taylor not here, so minor agenda bash
[15:47:45] <adrianfarrel> Deepak presenting on LIME Base YANG Model Work Update
[16:01:51] Laurent Ciavaglia joins the room
[16:02:41] <adrianfarrel> Greg Kirsky: ECMP is excluded from the MPLS-TP architecture. Not sure how Etherenet OAM supports ECMP. So only IP OAM has instruments to support ECMP - and that seems to be black magic.
[16:03:11] Laurent Ciavaglia leaves the room
[16:03:43] <adrianfarrel> Carlos: Restate... ECMP should not be part of base model
[16:05:31] <adrianfarrel> Greg (again): Point out there are two docs in MPLS WG related to this work
[16:05:51] <adrianfarrel> Sam Aldrin: You said reachability is not part of OAM...
[16:06:18] <adrianfarrel> Deepak: OAM tools don't cover all ECMP paths
[16:06:51] <adrianfarrel> Sam: Does ping constitute part of OAM?
[16:06:56] <adrianfarrel> Deepak: yes
[16:07:07] Carlos Pignataro leaves the room
[16:07:15] Carlos Pignataro joins the room
[16:07:42] <adrianfarrel> Carlos: Rephrase. "Coverage is not guaranteed, but reachability can be achieved"
[16:09:22] <adrianfarrel> John Messenger: Does the model represent the lowest common denominator. If so, that would be disappointing.
[16:10:45] <adrianfarrel> John: Comment on implicit MEP placement. Ethernet can support explict MEP
[16:10:56] <adrianfarrel> Deepak: Yes can configure as well
[16:11:34] <adrianfarrel> John: Connectivity Check frames do CV and additionally incorrect connectivity checking
[16:11:48] Paolo Saviano joins the room
[16:12:04] <adrianfarrel> Deepak: we haven't removed stuff, but are trying to not force IP OAM to do stuff that is in Ethernet
[16:12:23] <adrianfarrel> Greg: Need to get terminlogy right. E.g. Continuity Check
[16:14:52] <adrianfarrel> Deepak: We will add table from 7276
[16:17:13] <adrianfarrel> Ron Bonica (as an individual): "Continuity" has baggage. Sometimes this may apply best to connection-oriented. Maybe we don't have continuity in connectionless systems. Perhaps we have reachablity.
[16:18:19] <adrianfarrel> Greg: need to als monitor and flag leaks (i.e. misconnection error)
[16:19:18] <adrianfarrel> Qin: need to avoid model that is ethernet-specific. need to be independent
[16:20:04] <adrianfarrel> Ruediger: want to watch interface counters or say out of scope
[16:21:30] <adrianfarrel> Adrian says: not just "reachability" but "lossless reachability"
[16:21:41] <adrianfarrel> Greg: Need passive and active OAM (per Ruediger)
[16:22:45] <adrianfarrel> Chairs: time to call from adoption
[16:23:04] <adrianfarrel> Yuji: which version?
[16:23:55] <adrianfarrel> Chairs: latest
[16:24:05] <adrianfarrel> Yuji: Haven't addressed my issues
[16:24:17] <adrianfarrel> Chairs: Post v6 and then we'll call for adoption
[16:24:46] <adrianfarrel> Yan Zhong to present on behalf of Tom Taylor on Applicablity
[16:25:33] Paolo Saviano leaves the room
[16:31:10] <adrianfarrel> Greg Mirsky: Would be good if use cases provided to demonstrate applicability of proposed model to other technologies. Include IP, IP/MPLS, MPLS-TP. Currently no work on IP OAM YANG model. For MPLS/IP OAM have offered to help extend MPLS-TP OAM YANG model for MPLS/IP OAM
[16:31:39] <adrianfarrel> Yan: The examples here are to show applicability, but specific YANG models will be done in relevant WGs
[16:32:07] <adrianfarrel> Carlos: Have you connected with YANG authors in other WGs to check that the applicability works
[16:32:13] <adrianfarrel> Yan: Yes, we'll do that
[16:32:48] <adrianfarrel> Qin Wu: Yes we have a plan to contact the authors of various YANG models after the base model is adopted
[16:33:07] <adrianfarrel> Greg: I think I can represent some o the DTs for technology-specific models
[16:35:28] <adrianfarrel> Qin Wu presents on Performance Measurement
[16:40:39] <adrianfarrel> Greg Mirsky: Suggest to look at LMAP work where ref model includes necessary components
[16:41:47] <adrianfarrel> Ron Bonica (as individual): Argue with "MUST". Also possible to leave space to add later. Or go to other folk for expertise
[16:42:24] <adrianfarrel> Benoit Claise (AD): Combine previou two comments. Having a place-holder is good enough
[16:42:25] Daniel King leaves the room
[16:42:54] <adrianfarrel> Chairs to talk about Next Steps
[16:43:14] <adrianfarrel> YANG model - new revision and then poll for adoption
[16:43:30] <adrianfarrel> Applicablity - set up call for authors to brainstorm
[16:44:01] <adrianfarrel> Architecture - we nothing in the pipe. Need volunteers. [Hands go up in room!]
[16:44:29] <adrianfarrel> Benoit: To ensure things are good, make sure YANG models work together
[16:44:32] <adrianfarrel> EOM
[16:44:40] adrianfarrel leaves the room
[16:45:48] Meetecho leaves the room
[16:46:13] joel jaeggli leaves the room
[16:54:38] Carlos Pignataro leaves the room
[19:39:17] joins the room
[19:44:24] leaves the room
[21:20:38] joel jaeggli joins the room
[21:48:14] joel jaeggli leaves the room
Powered by ejabberd Powered by Erlang Valid XHTML 1.0 Transitional Valid CSS!