Page created for the IETF 96, July 17 - 22 2016, in Berlin.
DNSOP met Monday Afternoon for 2 hours in the second afternoon session.
The Chairs were most pleased with the draft-woodworth-bulk-rr draft, as it was the authors first draft, and their first IETF, and was received positively.
There was also a short updates on the 6761 problem statements, and the current plan is to ask the working group to adopt one of the two drafts to move forward.
Did not meet in Berlin
draft-ietf-grow-blackholing revised in last call. AD will move draft forward
LIME met on Thursday afternoon during the IETF96 week.
Three main topics:
Met on Friday 7/22. Main focus of the agenda was discussing open issues related to the three WG documents in WGLC. Good progress in solving the open issues due also to the f2f work done during the week by the editor and WG participants. Comments expected until 7/31, new version in August, followed by 2nd LC. Virtual interim in September if necessary. Proposals for new work are expected on the mail list. WG will meet in Seoul only if there is a consistent number of new proposals, or critical items that need to be solved f2f. The WG also received a presentation from the EC project and a demo of the Jacobs University implementation.
Approx. 120+ participants in the 2.5 hour NETCONF session.
Andy Bierman will provide an update for RESTCONF and YANG Patch within 2 weeks.
“YANG Push” drafts were discussed (Eric Voit, et.al.). The WG agreed to adopt the three drafts 5277bis, NETCONF Transport and RESTCONF & HTTP Transport. The next version of the drafts will be accepted as draft-ietf.
System Keychain Model, SSH/TLS Client Server Models, TLS/NETCONF Client Server Models, Zero Touch (Kent Watsen): Issues will be addressed and drafts will be updated as discussed. Client models will be addressed in the next version.
I2RS strawman proposal (S. Hares): Sue presented the I2RS requirements documented in ephemeral state draft. There was no further comments. The chairs asked the attendees to comment and discuss if they see an issue. Otherwise they will are seen as accepted. Sue agreed to provide an overview on which requirements are addressed in which draft and where an action is necessary.
Refined YANG datastores with Meta-data (R. Wilton): The datastore conceptual discussion is continuing in NETMOD WG. It has been proposed that the architectural discussion should be continued in NETMOD WG and the protocol part as well as the necessary changes to the datastore definition to NETCONF RFC should be done in NETCONF WG.
Two 2-hour NETMOD sessions (Monday and Tuesday)
Roughly 100 participants in both NETMOD sessions
The first session was dedicated to opstate and schema mount
The second session reviewed 9 chartered drafts and 3 unchartered drafts
Drafts nearing last call include 6087bis, routing-cfg, and acl-model
Ops AD stressed the urgency of unblocking other drafts ASAP
WG needs to provide clear guidance on how current drafts should handle 1) applied configuration and 2) derived state for system-generated objects in the interim while waiting for the rollout of a complete opstate solution
Three items on the on the agenda, all with an IPv6 orientation
WG is trying to progress -Operational Security Considerations for IPv6 Networks- after 4 years of existence to closure
WG meeting progressed positively and no notifications needed to highlight further to OPS ADs
Very high attendance by the standards of a radext meeting (19 people on blue sheets)
Productive discussions on all presented drafts
four individual drafts waiting to become WG documents; mostly looking on-topic and useful
The vivid discussions made us go overtime, will request a 90 minute slot for IETF97 to accomodate
SUPA's Information Model (GPIM) and Data Model (EPIM) are now WG drafts, work on them is progressing slowly.
New Framework draft, replaces the former Architecture and Value Proposition drafts. The meeting supported its adoption as a WG draft (now announced on the SUPA list).
Problem Statement draft: vigorous discussion of whether it is needed, maybe it should be replaced by an Applicability draft. Further discussion was left for he SUPA list.
Rakesh Kumar gave a brief presentation on work in the I2NSF WG, that work may also be relevant for SUPA.
Monday afternoon session, 120 minutes. 41 attendees in the room + 5 remote participants in the room.
Thursday afternoon, session 2, 120 minutes. About 29 attendees in the room + 3 remote participants.
The content of this page was last updated on 2016-07-28. It was migrated from the old Trac wiki on 2022-12-19.