- Tuesday, July 22, 2014

mif@jabber.ietf.org

Tuesday, July 22, 2014< ^ >

Olafur has set the subject to: IETF-85 Atlanta meeting in progress

Room Configuration

Room Occupants

GMT+0
[20:34:57] Dmitry Anipko joins the room
[20:43:12] Ole Troan joins the room
[20:43:49] zhen joins the room
[20:44:21] Suz joins the room
[20:44:48] alessandro amirante joins the room
[20:45:05] room feeder joins the room
[20:45:23] Andrew Yourtchenko joins the room
[20:46:02] Dave Thaler joins the room
[20:46:26] monitor feed joins the room
[20:46:27] Dave Thaler has set the subject to: IETF-90 Toronto meeting in progress
[20:46:33] <Dave Thaler> did we get a jabber scribe or is one sitll needed?
[20:47:08] S73654-TX0479C9FDA joins the room
[20:48:20] <Dave Thaler> if I don't hear anyone else doing so, I can jabber relay now that I'm in the jabber room
[20:48:23] <zhen> i am the jabber
[20:48:31] <Dave Thaler> great
[20:48:36] <zhen> i am the jabber scriber
[20:48:57] Andrew Sullivan joins the room
[20:50:00] Paolo saviano joins the room
[20:56:14] <Dave Thaler> that discussion was about 2nd paragraph from end of 2.1: "It shall be possible for sources of PVD information to communicate that some of their configuration elements could be used within a context of other networks/PVDs. PVD-aware nodes, based on such declaration and their policies, may choose to inject such elements into some or all other PVDs they connect to.
"
[20:56:56] <Dave Thaler> and the example sentence I quoted was from 5.1: "As an example, node administrator could inject a not ISP-specific DNS server into PVDs for any of the networks the node could become attached to.
"
[20:58:09] <Dave Thaler> slides for preso now: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/90/slides/slides-90-mif-2.pptx
[21:15:00] Kiminori Nagoya joins the room
[21:15:21] Kiminori Nagoya leaves the room
[21:24:32] Dmtiry Anipko joins the room
[21:41:47] <Dmitry Anipko> to Ted: that's why there are connectivity tests in MPVD arch, and in most cases the OS could avoid multiple connect attempts
[21:42:07] Ales Vizdal joins the room
[21:46:20] <Dave Thaler> Erik's question about how a captive portal is handled (or not) in the MIF Arch is a good question.
[21:47:22] <Dmitry Anipko> I can add text on that, as a separate scenario/ topology
[21:47:23] <Dave Thaler> Dan Wing slides: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/90/slides/slides-90-mif-3.pptx
[21:50:05] <Dmitry Anipko> 2 comments
[21:50:25] <Dmitry Anipko> 1 comment - 1.
Many of the use cases look like general problem of MPVD / selection of the "right/best" PVD,
while the text seems to implicitly tie those those generic procedures with the
"multiple connects - try/compare results/adjust" original-HE-style.
Example: >>If the node can't find useful information in the
Soft Set, DNS queries would be sent out on multiple interfaces on
relevant PVDs in parallel to maximize chances for connectivity.
I'd agree with the proposal that if something is missing in the arch doc, let's
move that into the arch doc - please feel free to suggest the changes.
If we want to leave the generic MPVD selection in this document (though there is some overlap with MPVD arch),
that's fine too, but then we should deliniate different independent parts of the solution
(generic PVD selection/filtering vs multiple connection attempts).
For me, the "HE" part would specifically deal with the
case where after all the filtering / sorting, the host is left with multiple equivalent
PVDs, and it would say what a host could do about that in HE style (when to try HE in one PVD,
when to try in multiple, how to try in multiple).
[21:52:17] <Dmtiry Anipko> I think my comment is very much in agreement with what Lorenzo said
[21:52:48] <Dave Thaler> you want anything channeled to mic?
[21:53:04] <Dmtiry Anipko> yes, i think that would be still useful
[21:53:06] <Dave Thaler> prefix with "mic:" if so for future comments
[21:53:12] <Dmtiry Anipko> will do, thanks
[21:53:25] <Dave Thaler> can you rephrase what you want relayed to mic?
[21:53:58] <Dmtiry Anipko> Agree with Lorenzo that generic selection of PVD should be separated from HE
[22:00:32] <Dave Thaler> Jouni's slides: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/90/slides/slides-90-mif-4.ppt
[22:02:37] Andrew Yourtchenko leaves the room
[22:06:17] <Dave Thaler> for remote: hums to adopt, silence to not adopt
[22:06:37] <Dave Thaler> (question was all three, wasn't separate question for each)
[22:06:51] <Dave Thaler> Suresh's slides: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/90/slides/slides-90-mif-5.ppt
[22:07:08] <Dmitry Anipko> Suresh's audio is almost inaudible
[22:07:09] <zhen> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/90/slides/slides-90-mif-5.ppt
[22:07:33] <Dmitry Anipko> better now, thanks
[22:10:16] <Dmtiry Anipko> mic: should this be a separate document from the API document?
[22:10:33] zhen leaves the room
[22:10:34] <Dmtiry Anipko> mic: or the API should be covering session continuity
[22:16:02] S73654-TX0479C9FDA leaves the room
[22:17:24] <Dave Thaler> in line to relay
[22:35:20] <Dave Thaler> slides: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/90/slides/slides-90-mif-6.pptx
[22:37:10] Ole Troan leaves the room
[22:41:05] Suz leaves the room
[22:41:37] Andrew Sullivan leaves the room
[22:43:30] room feeder leaves the room
[22:45:39] Andrew Yourtchenko joins the room
[22:46:48] Paolo saviano leaves the room
[22:46:51] alessandro amirante leaves the room
[22:46:56] Dmtiry Anipko leaves the room
[22:47:04] Ales Vizdal leaves the room
[22:47:21] monitor feed leaves the room
[22:47:35] Andrew Yourtchenko leaves the room
[22:49:35] Dave Thaler leaves the room