►
From YouTube: IETF93-ROLL-20150721-1740
Description
ROLL meeting session at IETF93
2015/07/21 1740
A
Oversight
program
manager
in
the
IAB
and
I'm
here
today,
because
both
the
six
slow
and
roll
working
groups
received
liaison
statements
from
itu-t
study
group
15
and
those
liaison
statements
have
a
requested
response
date
of
this
coming
Friday.
We
just
received
the
liaisons
last
Friday.
We
have
a
request
and
response
date
of
this
coming
Friday.
Now
we
discussed
these.
A
These
actually
apply
more
26
load
than
to
roll
because
it
has
to
do
with
the
6lowpan
registry
in
iono,
for
dispatch
header
bites
and
for
the
escape
dispatch
bite
that
then
had
can
allows
for
a
second
command
bite.
After
that,
and
what's
happened
is
a
an
itu-t
specification
has
been
published.
Actually,
two
specifications
have
been
published:
g99
03
in
g
9,
9
05
and
those
specifications
use.
A
Use
the
existing
dispatch
header
bytes
as
they're
defined
in
the
iono
registry,
and
they
use
the
escape
bite
with
some
additional
following
bites,
also
as
defined
in
the
registry.
Now
what
I
Anna
is
asked
or
what
itt
is
asking
for,
is
confirmation
that
we
will
not
make
any
changes
to
the
definition
of
those
dispatch
bites
that
would
affect
the
g9
903
and
g
9
9
05
specs.
A
And
we,
on
the
other
hand,
feel
as
though
I
t
we
want
to
collaborate
with
itu-t
to
create
the
registry
for
the
escape
bites,
that
that
itu-t
is
defined
in
those
specifications
but
has
not
defined
a
registry
for
and
in
fact
the
itu-t
has
written
down
that
they
they
recognize
that
that
registry
has
to
be
created.
They
just
haven't
created
it
yet
so
Scott
Mansfield's
going
to
give
us
some
more
details.
A
A
C
B
C
C
C
D
C
Yeah
well
then,
it's
okay!
While
we're
doing
that,
let's
go
back
a
little
bit.
Yeah
the
IETF
has
a
liaison
tool.
If
you
go
to
the
main
IETF
gorg
page
there
on
the
left-hand
side
of
the
IETF
page
down,
there's
a
liaison
place
right
and
there
is
a
liaison
managers
and
liat
liaisons.
If
you
click
on
liaisons,
you
will
go
to
a
page
that
shows
all
of
the
liaisons
that
we
get
and
for
this
particular
liaison
that
we
received
from
the
itu-t
we
had,
it
was
number
14.
14
was
26
low
and
14.
C
The
content
was
identical:
okay,
okay
and
so
the
red
bits
are
what's
kind
of
important
here.
So
we've
got
the
itu-t
saying
what
their,
what
their
role
is
and
the
recommendations
that
they've
created
that
are
using
the
IETF
of
protocols
and
and
information
and
then
so
they
have
their
and
it
points
out
what
their
normatively
referencing.
C
So
if
you
go
through
the
next,
they
created
this
liaison
to
point
out
how
they're,
using
it
and
they're,
pointing
out
how
they
used
the
documents
as
they
were
published
by
the
IETF
and
creating
and
referencing
them
the
way
they're
supposed
to
and
pointed
out
that
it
would
be
damaging
to
their
implementations
and
to
customer
implementations.
If
this
occurred,
so
if
you
go
to
the
next
slide,
I
think
it
points
out
it's
somewhere
in
the
real
liaison
that
goat
next
next
slide.
C
Here
it
not
Balan,
and
so
this
is
the
this
is
their
rationale
for
requesting
that
we
don't
change
what
they've
already
done
and
that
is
Japan
and
France,
or
deploying
smart
meters
and
they're
looking
at
and
they're
using
this
equipment
and
using
these
specifications
already
so
go
to
the
next
slide.
So
the
idea
here
is
just
one:
that's
just
more
of
the
liaison
to
go
on
the
next
slide.
C
We
should
foster
that
relationship,
and
this
is
an
example
of
where
we
can
help
by
writing
a
internet
draft
that
provides
the
guidance
to
iono
on
creating
a
registry,
because
the
last
thing
I
think
the
IETF
would
want
is
the
itu-t
creating
a
registry
that
they
maintain
themselves.
So
that
seems
that
to
me.
So
if
you
go
to
the
next
slide,
so
what
we
talked
about
in
six
low
is
created
very
simple
liaison
in
this
nipple
liaison
says
thanks.
C
F
Schedule,
cisco,
I
agree
with
with
the
text,
but
when
you
said
the
last
thing
I
want
is
them
to
create
a
registry.
I
would
put
a
bell
on
that.
The
estate
bite
was
we
not
defined
around
now.
We
kind
of
low
for
I
would
say
another
party
to
put
some
by
you
in
them,
and
I
think
it's
it's
an
option
on
the
table
to
recognize
that
out.
C
C
No
you're
right
that
that's
a
and
and
might
have
said
it
a
little
strongly,
but
at
least
it
got
you
to
the
microphone
and
we
could
say
yes,
I
mean
that's
a
good,
that's
a
good
point,
and
that
would
be
something
that
we
would
talk
about
in
the
draft
that
about
but
ranges
we
would
do
for
this
group
in
I
in
the
iono
registry.
So
yeah,
that's
that's
great
any
other.
So
let's
just
put
up
the.
If
you
can
put
up
the
text,
I
I
did
it
in
VI,
because
you
know
you
got
it.
C
E
C
So
I
have
this
in
a
format:
that's
easy
for
the
liaison
Secretariat
to
put
it
into
the
liaison
tool.
So
the
formatting
looks
a
little
odd,
but
oh,
the
spinny
circle
of
happiness
only
doesn't
only
happen
on
the
PC.
Doesn't
there
we
go
so
common
common
things
here.
So
what
we're
saying
is
that
this
is
coming
from
the
six
low
chair
and
the
roll
matter
of
fact
it
looks
like
change
it.
G
E
C
Because
it's
they're
sick,
slow
and
roll
voices,
people
and
then
the
in
the
carbon.
There
is
the
area
directors
that
are
responsible
for
six
low
and
roll,
and
it's
going
to
now.
This
is
something
that
it's
part
of
an
ITU
thing.
It
actually
goes
to
the
tsv,
which
is
there
Secretariat
for
the
for
the
itu-t
sector.
A
I
thought
what
we
do
is
is
is:
is
the
following:
the
six
low
working
group
reviewed
this
this
content
yesterday
and
it's
currently
on
the
six
low
mailing
list
for
anyone
to
anyone
who
wasn't
at
the
meeting
yesterday
to
review
and
comment
before
we
send
the
response
off
to
itu-t
on
Friday.
We
thought
we
would
come
to
roll
and
make
the
same
text
available
to
you
and
if
you
want
to
use
this
same
text,
that
would
be
great.
A
We
can
put
on
the
roll
chairs
on
a
second
copy
of
this,
send
it
out
at
the
same
time,
so
my
suggested
process
would
be
to
take
a
hum
on
this
text
here
and
any
other
commentary
that
there
might
be,
and
then,
if
it's,
if
it's
fine
here
within
the
room,
what's
the
two-year
mailing
lists
for
comment
until
Thursday
close
of
business
and
then
Scott
will
send
it
off
on
fri
right.
Okay,
any
discussion
of
that
plan
and
I'm,
sorry
that
we
didn't
have
these
in
the
slides.
A
A
Ok,
second
paragraph:
the
IETF
6
low
working
group
offers
to
collaborate
with
itu-t
study
group
15
in
establishing
a
new
registry
for
the
code
points
following
the
escape
dispatch
code,
this
new
registering
will
be
populated
at
the
time
of
its
establishment
with
the
command
ID
values
as
defined
ajit,
990
3,
+
g
9,
9
05,
and
we
have
a
third
paragraph
final
paragraph.
We
welcome
experts
also
active
in
sg-15
to
participate
in
our
next
meeting
the
IETF
six
lomo
working
groups
meeting
in
November
in
Yokohama,
ok,
discussion,
I,.
I
I
I
A
I
I
I
A
Ion
already
manages
the
registry
for
the
iph
c
code
points
that
have
already
been
defined
this
code.
This
registry
would
be
in
parallel
with
those
existing
registries.
I
might
call
it
a
sub
registry
off
of
the
overall
iono
registry
will
work
out
that
detail,
but
it
isn't
an
adjunct
to
registries
that
already
exists
in
iono
and.
I
A
H
I
J
A
H
C
H
A
A
A
C
A
Let's,
I'm
not
sure
what
you're
asking
for
about
the
statement.
What
is
the
statement
that
we
agreed
to?
Oh,
the
conclusion
about
the
hum
is
the
their
support
in
the
room.
There's
consensus,
unanimous
support
in
the
room
for
sending
this
liaison
statement
to
itu-t
on
friday,
and
we
will
the
chairs
will
post
this
to
the
mailing
list
for
additional
review
and
comment,
because
our
works
done
on
the
mailing
list.
B
B
B
B
B
J
J
We
had
this
interim
meeting
and
and
we
thought
it-
I
mean
we
thought
it
might
be
useful
to
have
a
drive
that
just
carries
states
what
what
is
needed,
and
so
thank
you
very
much
for
writing.
It
I
think
it's
super
super
useful
and
I
send
out
of
the
long
review.
I
haven't
seen
any
feedback
on
that
Raju,
I
I
hope
it
does
mean
tonight
it
was
a.
We
can
only
contain
nonsense,
but
but
I'm
happy
to
help
work
on
this
on
this
day,.
B
B
F
Ok,
so
this
discussion
will
be
mostly
animation.
So,
as
you
know,
ripple
is
a
pretty
rich
routing
protocol.
Already
we
have
storing
and
an
on
storing
mode
which
are
proactive
writing.
We
also
have
a
experimental
RFC
that
proposes
reactive
routing,
which
is
kind
of
similar,
in
essence
to
aodv,
but
using
ripple
mechanism,
and
now
we
we
are
kind
of
proposing
something
which
is
a
missing
link
between
the
storing
mode
and
a
non-story
mode
within
ripple,
so
still
part
of
the
proactive
family
with
application
in
a
non
stirring
network.
F
That
would
have
specific
portions
that
would
benefit
from
story.
What's
in
scope
in
this
discussion
is
the
signaling
using
pretty
much
tripping
signaling
to
install
routes
inside
the
network?
What
is
not
in
scope
is
how
you
decide
and
compute
with
rods
would
be
installed.
The
key
functionality
addresses
a
point
that
was
made
again
today
at
six
dish,
which
is
that
it's
pretty
difficult
to
say
or
I
want
to
support,
storing
mode
in
a
device
without
knowing
exactly
our
mini
rods,
you're
going
to
need
so
so
that
was
always
the
primary
story.
F
Mode
do
I
have
enough
memory
in
my
device
for
a
particular
application,
particular
use
case
and
people
always
end
up
doing
non
starring,
because
that's
the
only
way
you
can
be
sure
that
you
have
enough
space
in
your
device.
The
problem
with
that
being
that,
if
you
have
many
hops
in
the
network,
then
you
will
have
a
heavy
cost
in
terms
of
source,
routing
and
stretch
in
your
path.
F
It
could
be
possible
that
another
device,
as
more
information,
for
instance,
start
doing
the
domestic
networking,
which
is
part
of
the
scope
of
six
dash.
Then
it
might
be
that
an
external
pc
has
even
more
information
about
the
topology,
the
neighborhood,
the
radio
quality
etc
and
could
be
out
even
better
path.
So
what
we
are
really
doing
with
this
simple
draft
is
actually
taking
ripple
in
the
SDN
world
in
the
pc
/
sdn
world,
but
we
are
not
creating
deterministic
path.
F
Oh
I,
I
have
this
parent,
this
child
relationship.
Here
it's
going
to
be
the
route
sending
to
the
egress
of
a
segment,
a
sequence
of
note
that
form
a
particular
segment
and
what
the
nodes
will
do
and
we'll
see
that
in
the
animation
we
will
set
up
a
route
along
that
segment
for
the
particular
destination
that
is
indicated
in
the
target
looks
like
please
so
we
saw
that
I'd
have
a
pointer,
but
we
saw
that
the
message
arrived
to
note
46
and
it's
about
56.
So
the
target
of
the
message
is
not
56.
F
The
idea
is
to
be
able
to
segment
of
rod
install
some
rotting
States
along
a
particular
segment
to
reach
56,
and
the
assumption
is
that
the
egress
as
a
route
to
56
in
this
case
the
route
is
a
connected
route
because
it's
directly
connected
to
56.
Thank
you
very
useful.
So
the
egress
of
the
path
will
be
this.
The
ingress
of
the
bath
will
be.
This
will.
F
Hope,
yeah
and
the
message
has
been
sent
46
about
56,
which
is
the
top
okay
and
so
from
there
46
does
instead,
the
classical
storing
mowed
down
to
35.
So
remember
we
are
in
non
storing
topology.
The
route
has
all
the
information
about
the
topology
at
least
the
deal
dag
that
was
built
out
of
a
topology.
The
root
sends
a
message
to
46
about
56,
saying:
hey,
I
want
to
establish
a
segment
and
46
forwards
along
the
segment
back
to
35.
F
There
is
a
dowel,
so
next
slide,
please
as
a
result
of
that
35
as
a
rot
installed
in
its
routing
information
base
in
trip
about
56
vr46.
That's
the
only
story
mode
rot
in
this
all
network.
At
this
point,
okay,
and
when
things
are
complete
35,
the
ingress
of
the
segment
acknowledges
to
the
dagger
odd
that
this
particular
segment
was
installed
in
the
network.
Let's
slide
please
so
so
here
is
the
state
as
it
exists
now.
F
This
was
the
pre-existing
route
in
56
and
we'll
keep
it
for
the
rest
of
the
discussion
and
the
the
path
that
the
hope
was.
The
rib
was
installed
in
35
about
56
vr46.
Next
slide,
please,
the
result
of
that
is
that
if
there
is
a
a
packet
from
55
which
really
needs
to
reach
56
in
storing
mode
without
add
to
go
all
the
way
to
the
root
and
back,
which
is
a
very
long
path
stretch
this
particular
case
now
that
35
as
a
route
2
50
6-36,
it
will
know
how
to
write
it
directly.
F
Well,
directly
is
a
big
world,
but
that
is
the
stretch,
is
much
reduced.
Then
again
in
scope.
Is
the
signaling
to
do
that
out
of
scope?
Is
what
causes
the
route
to
make
the
decision
to
do
this
particular
improvement?
All
I
can
say
is
that
the
route
before
this
improvement,
so
the
traffic
from
55
to
56,
because
everything
goes
through
the
route
in
on
story-
know
next
slide.
Please.
F
F
So
so
the
packet
as
I,
submitted
by
the
route
as
a
destination
to
13,
which
is
the
first
hop
in
the
sauce
crowd,
and
then
it
has
the
explicit
hubs,
the
segment's,
if
you
like,
24,
35
and
directly
56
right.
So
this
is
how
we
can,
if
we
have
a
very
long
line
of
sensors,
for
instance,
in
a
straight
line
of
parking
or
street
lights,
etc
am
I
am
are
currently
these
long
lines
of
sensors.
F
This
is
one
way
to
actually
compress
that
information
for
particular
cases
exactly
so
what
is
now
we
want
to
to
complete
that
route,
and
here
is
an
example
of
what
can
be
done
once
the
first
step
has
been
down.
Here
is
a
second
step.
The
second
step
would
be
to
say:
oh
now,
I
want
to
install
more
hops
to
reach
256.
So
this
noodle
message
goes
to
certify
being
degress.
F
35
already
has
a
route
256,
that's
the
one
we
just
installed,
so
the
rule
is
obeyed,
and
now
these
basic
pathways
AVR,
maybe
24,
13,
please,
and
so
the
dow
is
sent
from
35
to
24
24
213
that
the
explicit
path
in
the
in
the
bowel
and
and
13
being
the
egress
next
slide.
Please
will
confirm
to
the
route
that
this
new
state
was
established.
Next
slide,
please.
F
Well,
as
all
the
rest
of
my
network
is
still
non-story
next
slide,
michael
just
discussed
on
the
mailing
list
and
I'll
tonight,
so
I'm
just
for
those
who
read
that
list
and
wonder
what
Michael
well
as
gang
there
is
what
could
have
happened
instead
of
my
second
flow
in
this
variation
of
the
second
flow.
The
message
is
not
sent
to
35
it's
10
to
24,
so
we
are
talking
about
the
segment
which
ends
at
24.
F
F
We
basically
have
to
put
20
for
us
to
walk
through
35
and
35.
Well,
let's
see
on
the
next
like
that,
that's
exactly
what's
going
on
so
basically
the
routes
that
I
installed
this
time
for
56
are
just
here.
That
was
the
first
message,
but
the
second
message
has
just
installed
a
rod.
235
in
those
two
notes.
F
Next
lie:
the
result
is
that
the
packet
that
you
need
to
be
out
using
micro
use
case
is
a
back-end
that
has
one
hop
to
35
that
the
destination
in
the
back
end
and
the
writing
adder,
which
size
35
256.
But
we
have
installed
two
different
segments
which
are
not
connected
because
they
don't
go
to
the
same
destination,
and
so
you
still
need
one
half
of
rotten
either,
which
is
actually
done
in
35.
So
that's
good.
F
So
you
see
you
can
really
play
with
what
you
put
in
the
network
and
what
you
place
in
the
packet.
You
have
sort
of
simple
variations
next
line,
and-
and
this
lies
about
basically
the
discussion
which
have
happened
on
the
mainland.
So
first
discussion
was
about
the
terminology
in
the
6550
oster
god,
I
think
50
for
the
term
segment
is
used
for
every
straight
source,
routing
harp
in
the
rotten
either.
F
F
F
Then
again,
if
you
have
any
comment
on
that
or
please
go
to
the
mailing
list,
soft
comment
was
that
the
text
could
be
clearer
about
the
Dow
direction,
but
here
it
was
not.
The
text
was
me
talking
so
I'm
sure
you've
seen
that
the
Dow
goes.
The
noodle
goes
to
the
egress
of
me
rod
and
it
goes
all
the
way
up
to
the
ingress.
So
that's
a
very
classical
way
of
doing
down
in
repo
always
from
the
bottom
to
the
top.
So
it's
pretty
much
for
using
what
we
already
have
in
the
code.
F
And
finally,
there
was
this
question
about
what
the
message
that
completes
the
flow
from
the
ingress.
So
at
the
end,
when
all
the
rats
has
been
populated,
there
is
this
message
that
goes
back
to
the
root
and
say:
okay
or
not.
Okay,
by
the
way-
and
initially
we
thought
okay,
since
it
so
now
going
down,
it
could
be
a
dirac
going
up
and
there
is
an
alternate
which
could
be
oh.
We
could
use
a
soaring
nonce
touring
mode
ow,
which
is
already
going
up
to
actually
say
this
path
is
installed.
F
So
remember
the
end
of
the
flow
this
packet
going
to
the
route.
We
could
use
a
non
storing
dowel
with
the
explicit
passing
it
and
that
would
confirm
to
the
route
that
this
particular
path
was
set
up
and
then
again
asking
to
the
room
you
can
come
to
the
mic.
If
you
have
an
edger,
whether
thou
wack
are
non,
storing
thou
would
be
a
better
response
to
complete
the
flow
and
that's
basically,
it's
ready
for
questions
and
discussion.
Welcome
on
the
mailing
list.
Do
you
think
it's
a
useful
mechanism?
Do
you
see
application
of
it?
F
B
B
F
B
F
J
E
F
Draft
is
a
new
mechanism
in
the
protocol.
I
don't
think
the
fit
is
the
same
place
if
that's
three
a
new
mode.
Well,
not
water,
filtration,
because
we
want
to
leave,
maybe
the
other
one,
but
it's
real
new
operation
in
repo
right.
So
it's
three
different
document:
if
that's
okay,
okay,
really
different
me.