►
From YouTube: DASH Behavioral Model WG Feb 23 2023
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
Last
week
for
it-
and
so
it
looks
like
these
are
the
items
that
were
covered
last
week,
and
maybe
maybe
you
guys
could
catch
me
up
just
a
little
bit,
it
looks
like
did
we
cover
the
service
tunnel
private
link
last
week
now
this
PR
here.
A
Do
you
guys
recall
going
over
that.
A
A
A
Oh
okay,
all
right
and
I
used
to
send
jury
duty
today,
so
I
can
check
with
him.
Okay
and
then
hanif.
Is
he
here
today,
hanif's
not
here
today,
so
I'll
have
to
follow
up
with
honey
on
this
and
then
Chris
332
got
merged
right.
D
332.
I
think
it.
E
Me
we.
D
D
I,
just
you
know,
need
some
kind
of
a
I.
Don't
think
it's
anything
controversial,
but
you
know
it's
always
good
to
have
someone
else.
Look
because
they
find
things
you
yes,.
A
There
you
go
great,
just
make
a
little
mention
there:
okay
and
then
Vladimir
talked
about
this
one
yesterday,
Okay
so.
A
All
right-
and
it
looks
like
Marion-
has
a
conflict
with
that
is
Q4
company
meeting.
So,
okay,
so
I
guess
it's
just
us
then
do
you
guys
have
something
items
you
want
to
cover
today
for
Behavioral
model?
If
not
I
can
give
time
back
and
I
can
adjust
the
schedule.
A
Now
I
did
find
out
something
interesting
for
our
project
here,
since
we
moved
to
the
new
repo
and
I
filed
a
bug
with
GitHub
I
can
no
longer
link
these
items.
You
know
I
was
going
to
link,
for
example,
one
of
these
items,
so
I
was
going
to
link
it
to
I
think
it
was
142
or
242.
A
A
He
did
try
to
get
a
few
of
these
issues
over
yeah
I
think
he
did
it
so
see
here,
Sonic
net
Dash
and
then
he
did
pull
a
few
of
the
issues
over,
but
it
doesn't
have
nearly
the
views
that
you
know.
I
had
so
I'll
have
to
go
ahead
and
recreate
the
views
and
it
doesn't
have
all
the
work
items
so
I'm
working
on
making
it
look
the
same
but
yeah
just
so
you
know,
FYI
did.
D
A
Okay,
did
you
add
tags?
Oh
crap
something's
wrong
with
my
screen.
Anyway,
some
of
the
issues
added
to
me
lost
some
info.
You
can
move
them
I,
believe
all
the
issues
have
been
migrated.
Just
the
views
were
lost.
I,
wonder
how
he
did
it,
though
so
I
only
selected
some
of
the
issues
so
I'll
have
to
ask
him
how
I
did
it?
A
C
I
did
have
a
I've
had
a
side
conversation
with
Chris
an
email.
The
last
couple.
E
C
I
did
so
it's
not
done
and
I
don't
want
to
promise
a
done
day
or
anything
like
that,
but.
C
Was,
but
we
have
in
the
repo
right
now
is
something
that
compiles
the
P4
code
for
dpdk,
but
doesn't
run
it
so
I've
been
looking
at
it
like
there's
a
there's,
an
ipdk
repository
that
is
open
source
and
includes
a
dpdk
software
switch
as
well
as
like
a
bunch
of
other
control
plane.
Software
linked
together
and
I've
been
trying
to
get
that
working
and
I've
gotten
it
working
with
something
called
Linux
tap
interfaces
which
may
have
the
one
downside
that
if
you
try
to
write
it
run
a
test.
C
I
think
I
think,
as
as
a
I
haven't
tried
this,
but
I
believe
what
happens
is
you
can
actually
configure
the
MAC
address
on
the
sender
side
of
the
tap
address,
but
then
that
will
be
the
same
for
every
ethernet
frame
sent
until
you
reconfigure
it.
So
if
you
wanted
to
vary,
the
source
Mac
address
is
wildly
you'd
have
to
reconfigure
it
between
every
packet
kind
of
thing,
which
is.
D
C
You
know
so
that
I
think
that
turned
into
Christian
dumatrescue,
asking
in
the
ipk
slack
channel.
Do
we
support
v's
and
somebody
else
answering
why?
What's
the
use
case
and
I,
if
I
just
wanted
to
confirm
with
you,
I
think
the
the
reason
for
asking
was
to
be
able
to
have
full
control
over
the
ethernet
header
in
the
from
test
environments.
Is
that
the
main
reason.
C
D
E
C
E
So
just
a
quick
thing:
instead
of
a
tab,
you
know
interface,
if
you,
if
you
were
to
use
the
turn
interface,
which
is
happens
to
be
the
layer
3
Channel
interface,
would
that
make
any.
E
D
Supports
me:
it's
direct
okay.
Now,
that's
the
native,
that's
the
native
wiring
in
bmp2
is
VV
supports
nice,
and
what
we
want
to
do
is
try
to
just
recreate
that.
So
all
our
workflows
are
the
same.
It
could
be
the
just
exploring
and
experimenting
we'll
find
some
work
around.
Like
you
know,
maybe
a
tap
interface.
Maybe
we
have
to
make
them
promiscuous
or
something,
and
then
we
can
send
it
whatever
we
want
we'll
see.
C
C
And
it
even
supports
some
gnmi
commands,
but
that
may
or
may
not
be
used
could
be
at
least
for
bringing
ports
up
and
taking
them
down.
Perhaps
I
think
that's
what
it's
one
of
the
things
it
can
do,
but
anyway,
there's
just
one
dimension
on
the
side:
there's
a
little
bit
of
progress
going
on
there.
Okay.
A
D
D
C
Know
I
haven't
I,
I
was
able
to
use
last
night.
I
was
able
to
use
python
scappy
using
on
on
the
tap
interface
and
it
it
I
believe
it
modified
the
source
Mac
address,
but
everything
else
went
through
fine.
D
Yeah
and
just
might
be
that
the
packets
coming
out
of
the
pipeline
will
have
a
fixed
Mac
address
based
on
the
Linux
interface
right.
The
test,
the
test
traffic
generator
can
probably
do
anything
it
wants
and
whether
or
not
that
has
an
impact
on
our
test
cases.
I
haven't
figured
that
out.
I
think
we
should
just
keep
I.
C
D
C
We
made
people
that
just
we
might
be
able
to
mask
off
checking
Source
Max,
maybe
yeah
and
yeah
check
everything
else.
Yeah
anyway,.
B
C
Let
you
know
what
I
find
out
and
well
we'll
update
you
if
we
come
up
with
something
and
then
and
then
we'll
start
hitting
dpdk
bugs
after
that,
probably.
A
Thanks
for
doing
all
that
work,
that's
awesome
appreciate
it.
Anyone
else
have
anything
for
today.
A
Let's
see
Vincent
Russia,
oh
hey
Prince,
we
we
were
just
wrapping
up
I!
Think
unless
you
had
anything,
we
covered
the
notes
from
last
week
when
I
wasn't
here,
hey
Prince,
did
we
go
over
a
service
tunnel,
private
link?
Last.
B
A
Said
that
he
has
a
conflict
with
Q4
company
meeting
or
something
like
that,
I
just
checked
with
him.
I
wasn't.
B
Going
to
to
change
this
meeting,
yep.
A
A
If
that
makes
any
sense,
let
me
pull
up
a
calendar.
A
A
B
Yeah
I
think
I
talked
to
Marin
today
he
said
he
will
have
to
address
some
of
the
review
comments
and
and
based
on
on
the
inbound
flow.
So
I
am
not
sure
if
we'll.
A
B
B
A
Yeah,
okay,
so
so
I'll
schedule,
I'll,
rework
the
meeting,
invite
and
send
it
out
and
we
could
and
then
I'll
see.
If
you
and
Marion
we
can
do
bmv2
for
service
tunnel
private
link
on
this
day
and
then
thanks
for
answering
that
question
and
then
more
guidance
from
Prince
around
so
I
guess
this
happened
last
week,
I
wasn't
here:
Prince
review
Logic
on
a
returning
packet
that
had
a
source
IP
change.
Did
anyone
talk
to
you
about
this
Prince.
B
Yeah
I
think
this
is
one
thing
we
like
I
updated
in
in
the
year:
okay,
so
okay,
cool,
I,
think
folks
can't
yeah
take
a
look
at
that
and
okay.
A
And
then
this
one
we
talked
about
yesterday
in
community
week,
this
one
was
already
merged,
so
yeah,
okay.
So
unless
you
guys
have
anything
else
for
today,
I
guess
we
can
close
the
call
and
I'll
do
this
rework
on
bmv2
meeting.
What
do
you
guys
think
sure
does
that
work
for
everybody,
okay
and
I'll,
be
in
I'll,
be
in
Redmond
next
week,
so
feel
free
to
contact
me
up
there?
A
If
you
need
anything
and
oh
Prince,
I
also
mentioned
that
I
went
ahead
and
let
Youssef
make
an
attempt
at
sending
community
meeting
notes.
Last
week
there
were
a
couple
of
opportunities
for
improvement
in
those
notes,
so
I'm
working
with
him
on
those.