[09:43:21] Ron Cohen joins the room
[09:43:45] Ron Cohen leaves the room
[15:32:46] Ron Cohen joins the room
[15:34:06] danny joins the room
[15:34:28] <danny> hmm, where is everyone?
[15:40:35] Karen O'Donoghue joins the room
[15:41:02] <danny> this room is a bit bare!
[15:44:47] <Karen O'Donoghue> danny… can you hear the audio ok?
[15:44:58] <danny> yes
[15:46:28] <danny> slides for timezone not posted?
[15:50:59] <Ron Cohen> Who is presenting?
[15:52:11] <danny> Eliot Lear I think
[15:52:32] <Ron Cohen> Thanks. It sounds like him.
[15:53:15] <danny> who does he work for?
[15:53:25] <Ron Cohen> Cisco I believe
[15:56:55] <Karen O'Donoghue> so…. I don't have a jabber scribe so it will be me. If you can't hear speak up. Post any questions / comments. If I don't respond immediately you'll know why… 
[15:57:13] <Karen O'Donoghue> sorry on the slides… I didn't realize he was going to do the full presentation… 
[15:57:17] <danny> why is this being presented at TICTOC?
[15:58:25] <Karen O'Donoghue> because Yaakov invited him… last night… 
[15:58:41] <Karen O'Donoghue> and they didn't read my email that said I could provide the update 
[15:58:50] <danny> for what purpose?
[15:59:09] <Karen O'Donoghue> I'm not sure… yaakov said it was time related… and we do time for the ietf
[15:59:41] <Ron Cohen> How many people are at the meeting?
[16:00:10] <Karen O'Donoghue> 21 including yaakov and myself
[16:00:55] <danny> so is TICTOC now going to be the place within IETF for dealing with Timezone issues?
[16:01:30] <danny> if so that's a charter change
[16:01:35] <Karen O'Donoghue> no… the point of all this is the IANA is going to do this… 
[16:02:14] <Karen O'Donoghue> they are looking for a new person to replace the nih
[16:02:17] <Karen O'Donoghue> guy
[16:02:31] <danny> remote speaker needs to get to a microphone
[16:02:46] <Karen O'Donoghue> right… sorry I'll remind them next time...
[16:04:35] <Karen O'Donoghue> well… its a bit late, but here are the slides for the timezone meeting
[16:04:55] <Karen O'Donoghue> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/80/slides/apparea-5.pdf
[16:07:50] <Karen O'Donoghue> well… that link doesn't seem to be working… sorry about that… 
[16:10:06] <danny> worked for me
[16:10:24] <danny> must be your apple
[16:13:26] <Karen O'Donoghue> yeah… my "apple" .. it finally loaded… not sure why the detail… 
[16:13:31] <Karen O'Donoghue> delay
[16:20:25] <danny> it
[16:20:37] <danny> it's pretty large so it takes time to download
[16:25:10] <danny> I still don't understand the need to encrypt a timing packet
[16:25:19] Karen O'Donoghue leaves the room
[16:25:31] Karen O'Donoghue joins the room
[16:35:42] <Karen O'Donoghue> I'm sure you garnered this from the discussion, but they aren't requiring encryption of timing packet, but they are concerned about the impact of timing packets that are encrypted as part of a broader tunner… and I think the security expert's comment that there is a way to except packets from the tunnel is an alternative to the drafts proposals.
[16:36:48] <danny> I seem to recall that Dave Mills had worked on make use of IEEE 1588 to improve NTP. I think I had pointed Yaacov to some of his work on this
[16:37:27] <Karen O'Donoghue> well he added the interleave stuff to ntp which is like the 1588 followup messages
[16:37:39] <danny> exactly
[16:38:02] <Karen O'Donoghue> We'd like to add that as an extension to the ntp spec… I haven't found someone to help write the draft. 
[16:38:12] <danny> :)
[16:38:26] <Karen O'Donoghue> don't suppose you'd volunteer… :-)
[16:38:47] <Karen O'Donoghue> or (seriously) have any suggestions
[16:38:48] <danny> I'm not knowledgable in that area
[16:39:23] <danny> I'm concerned that we didn't do the mode 6 subprotocol that ntpq uses
[16:40:33] <Karen O'Donoghue> yes… that is unfortunate… I'm unwilling to commit at this time, but I'm hoping to put together a quick draft to cover this… since I also don't have a volunteer for that… 
[16:41:44] <Karen O'Donoghue> That's my highest priority NTP action at this point. I also want to try to move NTP to full standard since it appears the process is going to be streamlined
[16:42:19] <danny> maybe we can talk next week when you get back
[16:42:56] <Karen O'Donoghue> yes… that would be helpful
[16:46:17] <Ron Cohen> I suggest that they document the problems they see in PTP and the improvements needed in order to support their application. 
[16:46:58] <danny> agreed
[16:47:51] <danny> and maybe that should go into changes to 1588 if possible
[16:48:34] <Ron Cohen> Yes. Exactly.
[16:49:39] <danny> are tim's documents publicly available?
[16:50:12] <Karen O'Donoghue> the slides and draft they submitted are available
[16:50:38] <danny> I'm talking about what they submitted to the ITU
[16:50:53] <Karen O'Donoghue> oh… wrong tim… I'll ask at the end of this quest
[16:50:55] <Karen O'Donoghue> question
[16:50:59] <danny> tim frost
[16:53:14] brian.utterback joins the room
[17:00:55] <Ron Cohen> Question for Tim: Can you explain the relationship cardinality chosen in the draft ? (especially between Clock and Domain)
[17:02:01] <danny> hi brian
[17:02:10] <brian.utterback> Hey Danny.
[17:13:38] <Ron Cohen> Question for Shahram: Currently the 1588-awareness is defined per device. I raised the need to have a per port 1588-awareness. Are you going to consider addressing this?
[17:35:25] <Ron Cohen> Comment for Yaakov: This is a nice idea. During the IEEE1588 standard work Kenneth Hann suggested a similar idea: using a generic CF for Ethernet (i.e.) define a CF Ethertype etc. 
[17:44:15] <Ron Cohen> Bye
[17:44:31] Ron Cohen leaves the room
[17:45:16] <brian.utterback> bye
[17:45:22] brian.utterback leaves the room
[17:52:39] Karen O'Donoghue leaves the room
[17:54:43] danny leaves the room
[22:21:10] Karen O'Donoghue joins the room
[22:24:10] Karen O'Donoghue leaves the room