Internet Engineering Task Force 93, 21 Jul 2015

Previous Meeting Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: IETF93-LWIG-20150721-1740

Description

LWIG meeting session at IETF93
2015/07/21 1740

A

So welcome so excuse me. Probably we should wait several minutes for the 8d Rhine to come.

A

B

C

C

A

So thanks for waiting I think we can start so welcome to our accession approach here. So, let's recap some logistics of the idea before we start this discussion. Rasta is not now. It should be well that your contribution to I hear they can make this public available. So that's not well and we'll eat the one minute stickers in volunteers.

A

Wait. Thank you very much. It is so well yeah yeah, so because we also have the tour of etherpad available on the tour's. I am NOT ROG, so you can actually start the editing Dale and their plea can check that page to see the fair comments or questions have been recorded correctly. If you note so, you can just make the accordingly modifications and we have passed through der, so we are going to brush it back. That's very good! Anybody who has no sinus.

A

So yeah, this is the all you of this working group, so we have some acting piece finish and ongoing, or something even expelled so for the terminology draft, we already finish their work and published it and we have several drops which is under shivering. So first one is the ik v to minimal drafts. We we are you sharing this document dancing. We have some email conversation with taro, but we.

D

A

No assigned chapter.

D

11 but I'll I can notate that all now update the sizes.

C

C

A

So, for a week senator drops from aerie we actually we've. We have done with the right, huh so I think with a summit date. So.

D

Just try to that I thought: I'd submitted it for publication, but you didn't actually change the state for some reason- and it's just told me, I didn't have the intended status on inside I've now submitted for publication.

C

A

We have four annas 3 document wise there. We go f from a lambo of a co-op contributors, so we have many discussing this. How how we move forward this draft either we go through two walking last call, or we can wait for more contributions to collect, and then we have the l with energy-efficient draft from connors. We will have some discussion today and we also want to know how to move this document forward, and we also have one working group document which is on here has minimal implementations.

A

But unfortunately, this document has has his pal us, probably if the oars, if any of the horses here we can also. We also want to listen, but also to know how we move forward.

A

So, and based on that, we have this agenda so after I finish this introduction, we will go to cold, actually, there's two document. We have more time with in discussion that here is minimum document.

A

So I will any question for legend.

A

Okay, so I'll go to their web document, but this time I didn't so nice. It ate the presentation slides from the author's, because all this document has been present in lb for several times in the previous analysis. So I think there are people who ought to know the background who this document had already got the idea in the document, so we men in discuss. We will many discuss how we move for this document. So yes, Jim and I were discussing to you. Thank you.

E

Yes, so last time I presented the status of the document and I again try to get more feedback. I sent out some questionnaires. The responses were zero, so I got responses that yeah. We have an implementation, but it was nothing to add to this I met with Olaf. Then we worked on some more additions, some fixes. We also improved it together with custom, so we have a good state in there.

E

So it covers the basic points in general, it was quite nice to have this document still open to add issues that are coming up now, because only now we have more and more complex as in areas and applications coming up. We actually see where we need more guidance, and so on the one hand it would be nice to keep it open to collect ease, on the other end, I learned from karsland that we might ship this before march 2016.

E

So since it's all belly butts in there, maybe we can start working group. Last quote you have a number yeah I, don't know try to get some more feedback on it. So I hope the working group glasgow will trigger some. Some comments and feedback and then yeah as I said ship days beginning of next year.

A

F

A

Questions so I. Actually, if you rest two options wise to keep the dog in the open a while and they are used to to ship it before.

E

Some deadlines, I, wouldn't call it options that it's an idea. So that's the nice part so whenever there is currently something coming up, because the yeah now we see they're actually issues and where we need guidance. So that's nice to put it in here, but the other thing is. We have kind of this. This deadline that something should happen at some point.

E

So that's why it's better to to ship it and that's what I want to do and then we could have some kind of living document in core, for instance, to collect the more complex things.

G

Brian, Hammerman and I have some number of questions. I'm not sure how many to count so I'm assuming that the the folks over in core have have reviewed this. Yes,.

E

So the idea is a group where we are collaborating on this and a lot of things that haven't been specifically or haven't been specific enough in our c7 252 went into this document. So we collected these clarifications here, how to use it properly, 8c to eliminate misunderstandings that bent in there and that yeah was the main purpose of this document. Okay,.

G

And just so I understand that this March 2016 deadline is just a line in the sand, or is there something driving that day.

E

So I heard there might be some organizational changes, and so it's not hear how this working group, for instance, will continue, and so before yeah losing is completely. There should be some outcome so that we can publish it. Okay,.

G

F

A

Ok so I'm question for you. Could you asks some experts to review the documents before the living room last call or during the working class.

E

So Bobby D I could add some experts and approach them directly to get some additional input being yeah a lot. There are already multiple people working on this document, but yet I try to find more people who can work on this problem was I have been asking for feedback for so long that I don't know who I should approach.

D

So, chair hat off, you know this. This is the kind of perennial issue with you know. The whole l week thing it's like it's all about getting implementation experience and you know, recommendations for lightweight stuff, but it is very difficult to prize that information out of people. So you know we appreciate the work.

D

You've done very, very much so, but you know, are the others also helped following your seat and given the same sort of informations so now, I personally I, don't know whether it's, whether it's best to kind of kind of keep the stock in open and hope that in the future we will get some contributions like yours or whether we just close it with your contributions and say document done, I, don't know what the best solution is personally, but my concern is that we just aren't getting the feedback from people.

D

You know and it'd be really nice to get that I I, don't know how we can try them out of them. You know we can't force people to give feedback. If that I want to give free back, they won't give it it it. Everyone knows it's useful. This information, but you know it's really a question of people any time doing that work. Simon.

F

I promise I'll read it this time. I'll. Do you feedback within the next month? Promise? Okay,.

C

Thank you very much very much.

A

So any more tears to view the document.

A

Okay, thank you. Okay, cool, probably always always is the case that you know during the working group last call. You can get more comments.

D

0 views from.

A

D

Just one more point them into brian's point that there is a distinction from people who, having implemented collapse, realize our thing issues with the specification and clarifications are needed. I think that's to steam from lightweight implementation guidance as well, so I think yeah I agree, there's a bit of an overlap, but I think you know their main also need to be that information. The call working group regarding clarifications and then that gets fed into the specifications.

G

So the robert one other thing that just came to my mind is that we could ask the the art 80s, who originally had the apps directorate review, the the coop specification to come back and do an early review of this one, because they'll at least have the institutional knowledge of what co-op is doing supposed to do. And so that may be a request that we could make as well. That might that would get you another set of eyes on it.

E

Maybe question from my side is their kind of a plan for for this working group longer on midterm. Let's say we're discussing.

D

That in this session, we're discussing that in this fashion, hood okay.

E

So so the plan would be to to do working group last fall in Japan.

E

Before before, before.

H

That Lao a gap.

E

Prepared for ya Japan, yeah, okay,.

I

I'll Karen Eric sonam, one quick, I noticed there is no security on sacred, secondary considerations to be done, and that's that's fine, but, like you, don't touch upon security at all. Just wondering is that explicitly decided we otoscope or something be there? Yeah.

E

It was this ever documented, tillis minimal and there's now's work that happened in the dice profile, where a lot of his knowledge meant interest. So yeah how'd you to read the implementer specifications of TLS or in specific dtls to make it like light. So I would keep this on the protocol on off coop and yeah having the security. It's a clean.

I

Layer below its.

E

And and have documents for that: okay.

I

Fair enough I mean.

E

I'm always happy if there is feedback that hey I found this super way to optimize it, and it might be something like a cross-layer optimization. But if it's for co-op s, that would be fine. So.

J

From six really shy city, I have a follow-up question: I didn't read the job, so I don't know if you already have something on security, but it would be good to have something to how you connect go app with dtls some guidelines. What are your experience with this implementation or all f's experience with with the implementation?

J

I mean how you interface with the between you know, go happen DTLS from the mutation guideline point of view, if it's already there that's great, but a very good brows showed me that it's not there because we did implement you know dtls and co. We did some hack, but it's good to have something in reading this document. From the coop perspective, you know what you want from the ddl ddns or how you someone could you know, provide these interfaces.

E

So some experience I could provide this. What is happening in the californian framework? We, where we have this DT less implementation. So it's not light white, but we have a problem there. So what's the best ati to manage the security parameters from your co-op at imitation- and this could be something that's fed in here and then to make it more like light, maybe there's something from tiny detail s that Olaf could provide.

K

One of problem, so there are some work currently going on, trying to define an API for the co app that supports several teacher s: texts such as open SSL or China teachers, but that has a step-by-step and therefore I. Couldn't get come up with text for that. So maybe within the next week the thumb something be happening, and we should and talk about that. That.

J

Would be great because that made.

E

This lab from the security perspective, complete I, would say, I mean lining out. The considerations is already a good input. I mean it's, it's not normative, so we don't specify the API here. It's talking about okay box. What are the different options and maybe add some pros and cons and of course it could be again more educate and educational guess. If you know okay just turned out the best and say: okay, we should go this way, but, as I said, the consideration of it is already helpful thanks. So.

G

Brian Haberman, there's, there's one point to keep in mind here: is that we're documenting what people have done so we're not we're not going to be be held to the you must subscribe. How this thing is secure right. So if somebody hasn't built security around it, then it's just an informative discussion of what might be done, but the purpose of the working group itself was was to document things that had been done.

G

L

Out this one to the last, that might be useful to add this edition security, because as a court order, quieres minimum- we we don't say anything about the interface with the coop layer and and I- have seen a struggle myself try to understand what would be what's normally done brothers, maybe it's nice to document some. Where was the interface has been done? Normally, ok,.

E

So I read this as a plus one. We should describe the API Howard. The coop implementation should leverage key keyless, no.

L

Should how it's done nowadays or added up differently or ya,.

E

Nabi I mean we don't say it should be done like this dominated it like this way, and yet it looked like that yeah. Thank you by.

J

The way do you have an implementation of a blast DTLS. Yes,.

E

So that's what I meant it's in California, but that's not specifically like wait. I mean a protocol itself, it's like light, but it's meant for less constraint systems but kind of the information we have to pass. It's the same lesson. So what do you have to provide to OGG less and is it better that you configure it or you provide something that yep security information provider that you hand in there and as I said so, this knowledge from the air can then be put in context with tiny detail s.

E

So we have something we have done and also the aspects how this looks like in constraint, implementations, yeah,.

J

We did implement actually go a blasty dl dtls unconstrained devices. We think it's a hack, but maybe that's the obvious way to do so. I could provide some feedback on this stuff. Yeah.

E

Maybe even some text yeah.

J

I could do that and you have text I mean we have something which is not published yet, but we did implement this and we have some experience how to do. But we are not super happy about that, but maybe that's the obvious way to do. Yeah.

E

I think it fits the criteria. It's something people have done so yeah.

D

We'd appreciate your input if you're happy to give it.

I

Eric erickson one more: do you have any numbers on ramen flats, consumption of a minimal implementation, as so.

E

I, don't have them I always refer to above Shahid. So there are some colleagues numbers. It was I, think 12 kilobytes of RAM and 76 kilobytes of Rome for the full thing I.

J

E

J

Yeah I, don't have numbers top of my head, but if you search for light li da chi, so we have this go F plus G TLS implementation. It's a paper published on these numbers when we have our experience from implementation of co, a blasty TLS so light. I triple e sensors German Li Jie edgy a secure like we're scarecrow app for the Internet of Things. That's the title.

J

Yeah I can sent the link to. My name is yeah. Yes,.

C

Thank you again.

I

We have those numbers copy it. For example, this draft cause it's easier to access drafts and papers. Quite often, I mean, of course, had a reference. Your work on that, but have the numbers here, yeah.

J

Then we need some Sun sections on in this draft from this experience. So exactly.

E

It goes hand in hand with the text you provide, and then we also have some numbers that will help other implementers.

J

Sure I could do that so.

I

I should contact you within yes, please and then another thing I would be interested in numbers like how low can we go? Of course, this was a fully fully functional stacked and does all the bells and whistles. However, if I want to do something very minimal, how low can I go? I know one very small implementation, which is only one make very, very small thing, but something cause quite open. When you discuss with people who are not familiar with IP in constrained environments, they always say no, we can't do I. He we can't do call.

I

We can't fit that in our 10k or pram or 1k, your friend I always say. Yes, you can. It depends. How much implement security is an issue.

E

Exactly so, I wouldn't want to write anything about this because it wouldn't say if this actually implements TLS or duty lies correctly and you can get it small, but how many holes are in there. I cannot answer this so so.

I

Has anyone done like very bare-bones super minimal TLS works only in one case which ones up Cypress, you know how low can you go? Is anyone done that I'm.

E

Not aware of this so really trying to push it to the limit, okay, I think.

J

Ctls gives you some sick numbers, but I, don't aware of any other stable or available dtls implementation. That would do this so.

K

Tiny details tries to do that, but I think the whole thing could be pushed down a bit more if you're clear on what your application does. So you can optimize specifically for that application. Okay,.

I

Would it be possible for you guys to go out on the classic thermo meter use case? I, send a value every X seconds and you know I not need one set of ciphers and all that you choose parameters, but just like how low can you go some intuition, it does not be exact number, but like some intuition, we.

K

Can try that perfect.

I

A

Okay: okay, thank you. My dear.

A

So the same thing we all do for their elwick energy-efficient draft. So call us please I.

A

Forget that he should stand in the pink box. Oh yes,.

M

Okay, so, first of all, let's give a bit of context on the status of the draft back. Well, the main idea would be that the draft has been rather stable for a while around honolulu that there were several additions to the draft we all from the authors and also from based on comments from working group participants or things for this, and then there was some additional new text added after that, so in Dallas we felt the author's felt that the draft was basically almost ready.

M

So we already asked whether a working group last call could be issued and then, during the meeting there was a couple of comments from Dominic Bartel who asked first whether it would be interesting to to add a section on the power services.

M

So sorry, the services for our saving in dect ule, whether it would be good to add something like that to the document and also he had some question on whether the dsme mode in 15 dot, 4 e, seemed something to be of interest. Whether one was planning to implement it and so on.

M

So as a result of that, the the authors of the six low draft, focusing on adapting ipv6 over regularly provided some text, which is now incorporated in the draft in the energy efficient draft on the power saving services in Thank You Ellie and on the other hand, we pulled the working group regarding possible interest on this. Dsme mode of 15 got 40 and there was actually no response. So we assumed that it was not worth adding text on this mode of 15. Don't worry in the draft so after that.

M

Well, we feel that the others feel that this document has been pretty stable, and so actually our idea would be to ask again whether it is possible to reach you working good. Last call for this draft.

A

So I actually have a proposer because it's very hard to handle the comments from their last point, so I basically I would like just to refocus on there. You know consensus of the many missed instead of the comments you received when you finally presented this walk to the group, and we see some spontaneously comments from someone else, I think basically a walking boob retail can can just you know, II glaudos comments from the last point and to move things forward, and the point is that if we, if it didn't get the you know, the.

A

Opposition comments from the many lists where you grow. Those comments from the meetings is that work for you.

M

Sir, can you move it again.

A

So my proposals that I don't want to ask again the question the same question: you again, we were handed this to the men in East. Ok,.

M

A

We have established consensus in previous meetings. We can bet on that somehow so.

D

Just to understand, from my point of view, so in Dallas there was a request for some additional work on the dsme. Not nothing was forthcoming. Nothing was forthcoming on the mailing list. Is that right so, and there was some requests for additional work on, so it was the other one again, dick.

L

You're, literally on.

D

It and you do get some information online, yes and that's been included. Yes,.

N

D

So we can assume them, therefore, that there's nothing going to be forthcoming on dsme and therefore it's, as you say, in a stable state.

D

So I think we can make the call again for unless is any other federal else, has any other suggestions to add to this document again. You know that, like a lot of the other documents, this is don't carry on and on and on with people coming forward when oh, yes, I've got an idea and things on that, but you know to some extent again suffers from the lack of input generally from people. You know wishing to add to this.

D

You know very useful document very useful information here, so I think we're also the point with this document that we put out to say: let's you know, let's just call it a day on this document and take you forward for working great mascot.

D

It's actually do it, however, hum from the room desert. Does everyone agree that we should take this document for working good last call home if you agree.

D

Home, if you don't agree.

A

Ok, my status didn't come assume.

M

That the winger and also ok.

B

Ok, you had my.

M

A

Ok, thank you colors, so because we have, we also have them PRS.

L

Minimum implementation drafts do you want to.

A

State the opening a saucer.

L

So the Tillerman draft was used extensively to created profile draft that was actually rod. Text was also used to their say that, since that minimal really help what if they waiting for, was to get a profile draft done so that we can then have some implementations of profile drop and then see what the values are actually so what comes out of it? So we were waiting for that kind of stage. Last time, I honest had some results on the ellipticals that has to still go into the draft.

L

So hopefully we will get an update after dr., honest but I think that's the idea that we can get something out of profile and healthy cows in so no time, and so so.

I

I will talk to.

L

The quarters and see how fast we can get.

J

From 6-8 ish ICT how different it is from the or should we lead it, I mean if we had a profile draft.

L

So the current version holy has a lot of psk and mention about the Republic keys and publicans and suffocate mode, but not on a constrained environments, so only PS kiss on constrained environment. So we need more numbers on the constrained environment is what is needed, that's mean difference and in terms of profile Rob. There are few differences because some of the things I, the identity is optional and I. Think oh PS k and for certificate I, don't remember what was the differences remember profile rough?

L

Clearly, I think it was a depth of the certificate tree that was mentioned. That comes off my head. That would have created a difference, but I don't remember because I de what we differences affect in limitation directly right now,.

J

That's that that's the point I mean if, if it's same the certificate for 30 certificates, for example, if it's same for the dtls mpls, then it's you know make no sense to have the additionally, they say about good, for example the other draft. But if you, if you have something specific for GLS, that's not covered in dtls, minimal draft or profile draft, then those details are useful, very useful here. If you, if you know some, then we would be happy to.

D

So yea, though there was a presentation, hannah skype in dallas, which have a lot of figures, I just don't think those figures of an incorporated in the trafficking is.

L

All right, that's one thing. One way, one of the things that weren't included is also those those measurements that we had with different modes at the possible right.

D

So I guess someone isn't ready for synchronized over.

A

L

A

But the if you want really want to keep this document open but preserve they did otherwise. We cannot handle a document that is expelled.

J

Very quick, quick question of shared from 6th edition city, so good recommendation. You have for DMS.

L

It special timed Achilles, okay,.

J

So it's a challenging yeah, so yeah I'm little confused about the name: TLS vs e TLS.

L

Was mainly retailers I think dealers came in yeah because we're discussing the whole thing that, but the main information was it is.

D

So the performance figures- also you know, they're applied things- aren't the elliptic curve operations. These are that that's not really TLS or detail a specific.

D

Yeah so basically the for the rest of the session I just like to kind of get a discussion going on the future for L we really and because you know the working groups been around for some time now. I think we've certainly produce one very useful, RFC 7228, which has kind of put a very useful framework in place. For now, when we talk about constraint devices so I'm, you know happy to have produce that that one RFC from this working group I think with some of the other drafts there.

D

It's you know the idea, obviously, of l we was to try and gather implementation experience, especially civil than lightweight constrained environments, and to document that so people will find it useful when it comes to do their own implementations. I think the main issue has been has already mentioned is actually getting prizing. That information out of people again I want to thank all the people who have actually submitted. You know all their results, implementation, experiences and everything, so that's been very useful and that exists in the current droughts.

D

Now and again, as I mentioned earlier, we could leave these dress open indefinitely almost and just build up more and more picture as more and more people who actually do implementations and willing to submit you know their experiences, we could add those to the documents, on the other hand, that you know that isn't typically our documents work in ITF they they normally come to a logical finish and they get published. So you know the conundrum.

D

Is you know how how you have that sort of living document assisting forever and ever effectively in the IHF, where they actually want to publish stuff, so I'm, not quite sure what the answers to that maybe Brian or bail, to help me out there. Just can you repeat.

E

D

Number 72 28.

G

Brian hammerman, so I think there's a couple of different ways. You could you could answer that question. The first point I'll make is: is that you know? Typically, you don't stand up a working group and then just keep these. You know indefinite internet-drafts, going on I mean it doesn't give sufficient reference.

G

It's not referenceable about in a stable way for anybody to to use that information.

G

So you know I I, don't see that approach being very feasible as far as the work group in general goes, there's absolutely nothing wrong with with publishing RFC's and then updating those RFC's as new information comes in.

G

But it gets back to the point that you made earlier that that requires a working group participants to actually provide that information and provide feedback on it.

D

So I guess to turn on that last point: I'd just like to get a feel for from the audience as to the usefulness of this group in that respect, and it's a kind of two-way thing. You know if people in the audience think that it's useful having this group to gather this implementation experience and documented. You know in the way that Brian suggested, maybe we publish and then update, then obviously it's a kind of to a thing. Then we kind of that input.

D

If we don't have an input to a working group, doesn't really exist and those documents one exists, they won't, they won't happen so to some extent, as I asked you guys to say. If you want this working group to is this, you have to contribute, you have to participate. You have to give us information and again I. Thank everybody.

D

Who's done that so far, but as you can tell from the volume of traffic on the email, reflector, there's generally not a lot of participation so, and that suggests me believe the two things either people are just reluctant and or don't have the time or whatever, to provide that information. You know I appreciate. You know it's often a lot of effort to come up with the note to put in to produce a document.

D

All these figures in I appreciate the effort done so far, but you know, on the other hand, if people don't have the time to do it, yeah there's this pretty little point in continuing with this working group because we're just not going to get get the effort. I.

J

Haven't shaved from six which HD I have a little comment on this, for example, right now we have go app, which is in a ready state, so we have some implementations. For example, we had six dish baptist for different implementations, 93% interoperable, so I mean that's now becoming an RFC soon and.

G

J

Maybe the authors have time to write something here: I mean this is I mean the lightweight implementation group is. The input here is based on what is produced in other I OT groups, and if something is stable there, then that is actually implemented, and then we have more guidelines here. Yeah.

D

The issues getting people to actually contribute that information, so I mean I'll, be involved in stands for a long time and, yes, you typically find in plug vests, and things are that people bring their implementations. They interoperate, and you know the spec gets improved due to the comments from the interrupts and things are, but one thing that that's rarely discussed is actually how they've actually done an implementation, and you know a lot of it.

D

Only the many cases, its proprietary information, it's confidential, you know, they'll, give away their secrets, especially commercial organizations, so I completely understand that you know, but nevertheless that is that's the way. It is therefore you know to try and you can't force people to give that information. You can it's in their interest to go to, interrupts and make sure they work with everybody else, but they're still not going to tell you I. Well, we use this really clever, making it a min ass back to to save 10k code spaces on yeah.

J

Yeah agree and, for example, amended in this blog test, open wsn. They has 6660 implementation and that's open source open license and the guy is very active. Thomas may be sitting.

L

J

Retain it and I would definitely encourage him to to write a draft for this, because that will be very useful because that's something which is now close to become a standard and that's the ITF IOT standard like ripple co-op, if someone says I, ripple, co-op and then the third I would say six days and then it's great to have the guidelines here. But I will push in my at least I will ask him: ok,.

D

And I agree and I think it also helps just for them to sell a lot. So it's open source, but you know, sell their own stack because if they can say well, you know we have a hero here, some figures we published an L wig, which shows how brilliant it is, go ahead and use it, so it helps proliferate. Their own throne work to some extent agree.

L

Sunny p.m. I would like to add, apart from just showing what your limitations can be done in like wait. What what also happened with TLS edited as well.

L

We also showed what the real issues were, why it was not easy to implement in lightweight that also helped the profile thing, so that kind of work would also be very nice, because that's how we started with the Detailers profile thing that it is minimal stuff that we were first showing water problems were so maybe that kind of work also is nice, maybe doesn't end up as a draft as complete our of support.

L

D

L

Processor yeah.

A

Yeah I also have two comments to the question before that. I want to put my just cut off so based on my experience of running this working group for almost four years. I have two fillings, that's very compelling. The first one is that you know people seems very reluctant to share their printing experience, especially for the people who work for some companies, but I also discussed with this point with the area code serials before, and he had the work met.

A

Very good point is that people who want to share will make their implementation more visible and who people who don't want to share their experience? Will you know Chester stop where it is so I think that's very good point. For example, we have the contributors from there coed community and especially from some open source, implementations and those who we only contribute there and share their experience. We only make their implementations visible to our large audience.

A

Instead of just making their you know, implementations just open toward smoker, and the second comment is that, because we are walking on their experience, thats related to the other working group, for example, 6lowpan or now is six low, or also we have their lower, even co f. But the problem for us to move very snow is that basically, our implementations actually involves from their specifications.

A

Co-Op has has some obscene published by thursday of the mov, so the implementers like materials, you have the problems that is kind of hard to get the sufficient information to make the very valuable implementation guidance document.

A

But it is always good idea to keep this for such document open, and we can make this or you know, point to collect more experience and from that point of view we can, we can have that this walking boot virtually exists about. We don't have to meet. You know every time. Somehow, that's a desert also a way to move forward. That's two cents: you can charge.

D

Yeah I think we can agree a mechanism by which we can release documents and update them, and you know don't know we don't have to meet every time and we can provide a vehicle for people to give that input and to give their implementation feedback and guidance. Then yeah I, don't see any issue with the working group consisting is, but we just knew. We need to have that input from people you know. Otherwise. You know it's it's one of these self fulfilling things it'll.

D

The working group will succeed and everyone will benefit if people contribute if nobody contributes nobody's going to benefit.

A

Yes, certainly.

D

Stating the obvious, but.

I

Again, our recording getting the contributions I was wondering um have syrup in some outreach efforts, something of course the group of people sitting here and the main list is kind of small, so outreach efforts are outside of that group to get the information.

A

Yeah I had done some outreach to which some people from Berkeley for an open tab, listen, but that this time, because we have hacks in there with you but the previous, like writing emails, but they kind of they don't attend the regular idea of meetings. So that's a fiscal issue for them and also I very long before I also contact us contiki people and I guess the similar response. Somehow, okay.

I

Yeah I don't mean I, don't have a silver bullet, but if you can come up with some incentives to get of information, Biden beers.

D

O

D

Issue is a kind of field of dreams thing you know. If we we build the group, everyone emeril more common, provide the information everyone's going to love, but you know it's something obviously missing which isn't like that. Making that happen, whether it's better.

P

D

One, maybe it's just a bit we'll just we'll just give everybody bare I'll.

G

Get a shot we could lie to them. We have a working group named beer.

A

That's a bit of whiskey's also, we have the beat, and vice and the previously in there nanog we have the beyond jeers.

G

Bits and bytes and beer, okay, so I just want to go to respond to one of the suggestions about you know the working group as a whole there's a couple of different things that we've done differently in the last year or so at the iesg.

G

We've charted working groups that are designed not to meet so that everything is virtual.

G

Those groups are generally meant to be very short-lived, so one of them is supposed to be done in under a year, but that doesn't mean that we can't do something similar here. My only concern is is that it still requires people to contribute and participate which, as Robert and and others have pointed out, really haven't, hasn't occurred. So I would be a little concerned with that, but that's one option and to me that really just looks like a working group.

G

That's in hibernation, the working groups, though the mailing list stays around people, can use it to discuss and all the infrastructure is in place. If there's a need to push a document forward. So.

L

G

L

That that's an option.

G

But I'm going to reiterate what you guys have been saying is: is that keeping the working group alive means that there's more than just two or three people going? Oh, hey, look right.

A

Yes, I agree: I'm I can agree with you more because for further option. You just proposed and also I for your concerns about the contributions for the contributions from the implementers I I. Don't have you know much concern because we have the other working groups walking where we all miss my coop and 60 or roll or AC e. So so.

D

I guess you know since feasible that you could you could encourage the sort of L week working within the working groups themselves. Maybe.

G

Okay, okay, Robert I, didn't give you permission to read my mind because that's why I was coming up here is to say it's not that infeasible for for people to identify which things have been done and if they're willing to document it goes into the work group where, where, where that protocol lives, so yeah, that's that's that's perfectly reasonable and in if people wanted a coordination mechanism for that, it's not uncommon for us to close a working group and leave the mailing list open right, so the l wig mailing list would exist, people could say hey.

G

This is what I'm doing and you guys say great. Let me see, let me see, let me see you review it and then you send them off to core or tcp em, or you know, HTTP dis, what you know whatever.

D

I mean nothing. The main advantage of that is you probably get more input on a mailing list, because I was mainly so much more active, there's more people subscribing to them and therefore you put it more like and more like to get participation.

D

D

Guess I'd like to get up get a sense from the people in the room. Sorry yeah! So.

J

There was a comment before that this working group will be may be closed before the next IDF. Did we decide on this yeah.

D

F

I think we'd want to with.

D

Sonny 10 all the documents in the pipe we're on a you know, get those published so there's a 55 or so drafts and already in the pipe. So we want to get those published so.

J

What is the status of looking good, no I mean, but.

D

Not only decide.

J

Is so it will be open far.

D

So well, as I was trying to get a sense for where we should proceed. So if the consensus, if there's a consensus, consensus to close the working room, I would propose that absolutely clear the documents in the pipe get those published and that's it. If.

J

Different entities is, do keep there's over.

D

Alone, so that's one less 11, that's one possibility. Another possibility is to something that's too probably to other possibilities and I'm just-just ideas possibility to is to kind of habit. Is this marcheline working group is whatever you want to call it where the people say, hey I'm, doing something to el wig, and then we go to call. This is your interest? Can you discuss it in your working group? So that's possibility too.

D

So the working group exists, but as a kind of the mailing list, only we don't really meet and if there are implementation experiences there may be a slot in the core meeting, for example, to talk about implantation and the third solution is just carry on as we are ready. You know continue to do.

C

The work here- okay,.

D

Look is that a reasonable summary. Is there any other possibility, I think I think you got more so.

J

Silly, we may have might have chances to meet in next IDF yeah as.

D

J

Yes, because I based the famine of clothes, all the documents.

D

Bottles I think the next I tfl we've all cities is too sure, but nevertheless I'd still like to get it home on those three, if possible. So I'd like to get a hum for whether people think we should close our way and after we've got all the documents out. So can never have a hum on that.

L

D

Sorry, ok, so the three off ok option number one closed. L week after we get all the current draft sound then it's no one does exist anymore. Option two is to continue l wig, as a kind of you know, low activity working group where the mailing list still exists, but if there's any real work happening in the future in terms of people collecting you from an implementation experience, it gets dealt with in the appropriate working group. So if it's about kayak.

P

D

Be done in cool.

P

It's about TLS it'll, be.

D

Done in or DTLA of the video and TLS that's option, two option three is carry on as we are so basically people the implementation in spiritual dress or get taken into our week. They'll be pushed through. Our league they'll be L week. Traps becoming our Suites through el. We is that will complicate heat.

A

D

Just landed compress these to the ok, so I keeping oh no.

A

D

So well with his two options: it's close it or keep it going yeah. Those are the two options. If you just want to limit.

D

What exactly? That's that's my thing. You know two threes non-regional thing.

A

D

Yeah, you know I'd still prefer to see option, 1a and 1b and but anything we'll.

H

A

D

Full strength, if you like.

A

D

Strength, as is now and.

O

A nice option B keep it, that's only estimating it's.

D

A one piece yeah mailing this only we don't really make yeah yeah. Mr. that way and.

I

I guess I'm the asset now I guess I think what I would like to see. That's now, but much more active and like I, said well.

L

Your inner would.

I

Like to see, but are we when do we have any tools for making that happen? That's this ice appear.

G

K

G

Don't think I caught all of your question was it? Do we have enough ability to keep to do to do 1a? What I was asking I mean I guess.

I

Are saying like I think most would agree that we'd like to keep one a I mean not look us now, but keep as a working group, but more acting. That would be the optimal okay. So almost.

D

Like if not in here, right performance or so great yeah I didn't make you more yeah, but.

I

Then, of course that would mean clearly we would need something to do that to do. We have some tools in mind to achieve that. So I.

G

Have two answers because you actually ask two questions: one is from the iesg ad perspective. Is one of the things that that I would really like to see? Is more people actually actively being involved in these discussions, and that I mean if you go back and look at the el wig archive I'm, pretty sure I saw some crickets running across there a couple of times.

G

As far as the tools question I think that's more of the people participating here as to how much influence do they have or how many contacts do they have in places where they might be able to get that kind of information to come into the working group, because there's there's really not a whole lot that the IETF as an organism asian can do to do that. But the people in this room who do have contacts are the ones that really need to be doing. That kind of outreach in and an information gathering.

P

Hi alikom I cannot do any commitments, but I know the couple guys in this room are implementing a full six. Lo pense tech turns last about five months six months and I think it was within the right community and I think we can. We can discuss internally and maybe can connect to some some document about like a reputation of a multithreading six open, spec I, don't want to do and don't want to do any commitments.

P

I can try to convince some people to write something about this and I think that would be perfect scope for for eldric more than for any other working, because it's not a only ripple immunization only uses local implementation, but the full stack. So I can try to convince some people.

J

Sixth, I can push my colleague who, who has six station human tation, he's super enthusiastic about this.

P

J

I will try with the success to fish and I hope that he will write some experiences as a draft here.

D

Okay, so worldly, but quickly try and do these homes in so um hum 41 a keep it going but try and make it better and get more input. Who would like to see that way.

D

Soham, for one be toning: it down just keeping it made in this only think to some yeah an option to harmful closing it after we ship the documents. Okay, it's pretty clear, then, will you keep going full severe.

A

Right, tell me something.

G

I parred the snarky comment, but that's the most input I've heard from this working group in about three months.

D

Well, well, that's it yeah, just a full of matt. I heard your home so yeah, you know, pls contribute! You know, make it worthwhile.

A

Okay, thank you very much. Thank you. How's Haiti give us on the blue stream.

C

B

Swimmy brother here.

D

B

In the lobby, honestly.

A

A

Each a straightening five is that we've all lost Laurel.

H

H

No, this is for.

D