►
From YouTube: IETF95-LIME-20160405-1000
Description
LIME meeting session at IETF95
2016/04/05 1000
E
B
B
B
This
is
carlos
pena
tato,
I'm,
Ron
bonica,
where
the
chairs-
and
let's
talk
a
little
bit
about.
Let's
say
we
now
have
jabber
scribes.
We
now
have
a
scribe.
We
have
blue
sheets
circulating,
so
we
can
go
past.
This
unto
our
status.
The
working
group
has
four
documents
bouncing
around
two
of
them
are
actually
very
key
to
our
charter.
There
are
two
yang
models,
one
for
connection
oriented
and
one
for
connection
less
Oh
a.m.
and
the
other
are
applicability
statements,
14,
connection-oriented,
14
connection
less
for
those
of
you
who've
been
monitored
by
the
way.
B
We've
had
a
couple
first
drafts
and
I
appreciate
that
of
people
who
split
apart
the
two
yang
models,
but
volume
has
been
low
and
I'm
kind
of
a
little
worried
about
energy
in
the
working
group,
so
Carlos
and
Benoit
and
I
have
met
and
we
kind
of
have
a
plan.
We
want
to
progress
the
two
yang
models
rather
rapidly
of
the
connection.
B
Less
yang
model,
in
our
opinion,
isn't
quite
ready
for
last
call
yet
I'm
doing
not
connectionless
connection-oriented
isn't
quite
ready
for
last
call
yet,
but
it's
pretty
close,
so
we're
thinking,
maybe-
and
also
this
is
my
personal
opinion.
You
need
to
throw
fruit.
If
you
don't
like
it,
we
think
that
it's
pretty
close
and
most
of
what
it
needs
is
to
have
stuff
pruned
out
and
more
places
to
which
technology-specific
contributors
can
attach
their
stuff.
B
You
know
more
ways
to
augment
it,
so
what
we
would
like
to
do
is
sometime
between
this
IETF
and
the
next
IETF
have
a
virtual
interim
in
which
we
do
some
a
little
discussion
and
a
little
online
editing.
Then,
if
it's
okay
with
the
authors
authors,
could
you
raise
your
hand
if
it's
okay,
with
the
authors,
you'll
spend
one
more
version,
will
have
a
working
group
last
call
on
it
before
the
next
IETF
and
hopefully
when
we
meet
in
Berlin
it'll,
be
in
last
call
sound,
reasonable
authors.
F
B
Okay,
now
that
brings
us
to
the
connection
oriented
applicability
draft
whatever
that
meeting.
Is
this
really
popular?
Oh,
oh,
that's
next
door,
I'm
hearing!
Okay!
As
for
the
connection
oriented
applicability
statement,
there
are
probably
some
words
that
we
can
copy
from
there
into
the
yang
model
to
explain
what,
where
it's
applicable-
and
you
know,
maybe
we
don't
need
to
progress.
The
applicability
statement
just
bring
its
text
into
the
egg
model.
The
connection
less
yang
model
is
probably
in
less
less
good
shape.
It's
very
new.
B
Are
the
authors
here
the
same
to
office:
okay,
yeah,
that
one
yeah,
if
you
could
spend
another
version
by
the
next
IETF,
that
would
be
a
good
thing
to
do
also
bring
in
text
from
the
applicability
statement.
So
we
have
two
documents
to
progress
as
opposed
to
four.
Does
this
sound
like
a
reasonable
plan
to
everybody?
Anybody
object
and
the
plan
again
is
to
publish
those
two
yang
models
rather
quickly,
because
it's
been
how
long
now,
a
year
since
we've
been
thinking
about
it
about
it's
it's
time.
A
Ron
I
actually
have
a
couple
of
small
things
to
add
to
to
go
into
a
double
click
level
of
detail
to
some
of
the
things
that
run
shared
when
we
are
thinking
about
the
young
models
themselves.
Benoit
reminded
us
to
always
go
back
and
look
at
the
Charter
and
what
the
group
was
chartered
to
do,
and
you
know
we
wanted
to
highlight
that
particular
section
in
which
we
talk
about
configuration,
reporting
and
presentation.
A
So
one
of
the
things
that
we
want
to
be
looking
that
we're
going
to
be
looking
at
in
the
model
of
themselves
is,
you
know,
make
them
as
generic
as
possible,
which
means
prune
and
make
them
I,
don't
want
to
say
bare-bones
because,
as
that
has
a
negative
connotation,
but
us
attachable,
reusable
as
possible
by
royal
bean
generic
now
know
so
much
that
we
lose
any
of
these
three
things.
Configuration
reporting
and
presentation.
A
I
have
one
more
thing:
universe,
please,
and
the
last
thing
that
I
want
to
remind
us
old,
is
that
we
as
a
working
group.
What
does
success?
Look
for
us
as
a
working
group
and
when
we,
when
we
step
back
success,
means
that
our
customers
actually
use
the
model,
which
is
all
the
different
local
specific
OEMs,
actually
have
not
only
the
possibility,
but
actually
do
the
work
on
reusing
the
model
on
augmentin
and
attaching
to
the
model
itself.
A
D
A
A
So
what
we
well,
we
try
to
figure
out
the
the
technical
logistics
of
of
the
projector.
You
know
we
did
wanting
to
remind
ourselves
that
success
is
the
other
protocols
for
users,
so
we're
going
to
be
tracking
that
in
the
wiki-
and
you
know,
if
we
think
about
the
work
from
the
applicability
statement
that
we're
going
to
have
to
pour
it
into
the
young
models
themselves,
he's
gonna
be
the
goal.
The
rationale
for
that
takes
is
gonna,
be
to
show
how
the
model
can
actually
be
used.
C
Remember
you
change.
For
example,
it
was
called
generico
am
now
it's
called
connection-oriented.
Most
of
these
guys,
they're
still
referring
to
all
draft,
and
the
second
thing
I
want
to
mention-
is
that
in
the
hackathon,
with
the
tool
that
will,
whenever
insert
a
model,
will
give
us
the
email
address
of
all
different
drafts
that
import.
C
I
A
This
very
City
yeah,
oh
I,
mean
I,
think
you
should
all
walk
and
talk
to
people.
There's
played
a
lot
of
places
nearby,
like
the
pink
house,
which
is
where
the
president
lives
and
the
May
square
that
has
seen
most
of
the
history
of
this
country
wrong.
Category
suggestion
this
morning,
which
is
a
place
called
la
boca.
My.
A
In
that,
is
it
fabulous
neighborhood
for
people
who
are
staying
over
the
weekend?
I
really
recommend
a
neighborhood
called
recoleta,
which
has
an
open
fire
on
an
artisan
fair
for
the
logo
and
again
I'm
gonna,
be
you
know,
reach
out
to
me.
I
have
already
a
template
adrian
of
suggestions
and
recommendations.
F
A
A
B
B
B
L
L
So
piss
on
this
is
angle,
with
weight
well
posed
a
land-based
young
model
and
do
several
update
since
luster
I'd
have
meeting
in
Yokohama
coding
to
the
working
groups
discussion
we
have
do
a
lot
house
update
and
the
most
important
update
is
great
split.
A
state's
generic
model
into
to
model
14
connection
arranged
natural
one,
volcanic
these
technologies.
L
L
Some
statistic
parameters
such
high
as
a
mini
delay
and
average
delay
and
mass
delay
in
the
02
wearin
way
change
it
to
a
trice
case
note
with
the
Belgrano,
with
the
fair
value
empty.
So
the
user
can
easy
our
flexible
in
services,
some
parameters
which
they
need.
Eight
okay
way
suddenly
says
it
is
0-2
were
in
last
month's
and
sin
receive
a
lot
of
good
comments.
L
Current
uses,
the
discussion
we
update,
we
update
our
document
and
model,
for
example,
way
in
the
0
server
and
we
remove
some
connect
least
remain
such
as
some
description
in
the
technology,
identity
and
the
sub
common
technology
identity,
and
we
also
removes
smpp
in
identity
because
they
are
necklace
technologies.
Another
change
is,
we
modify.
L
The
intervals
type
choose
a
decimal
684
because
the
later
because
what
our
previous
versions,
the
type
is,
cannot
satisfy
the
that's
most,
for
example,
reponse
three
million
seconds
and
another
changes
wage
in
the
interval
to
transmit
interval,
because
in
some
technologies,
specific
OEM,
for
example,
mpls-tp
there
have
to
interval.
141
is
a
transmitting
world,
neither
is
received
interval
and
in
our
base
module.
This
interval
is,
it
means
transmitted
intervals.
So
reduces
do.
Is
this
change
to
tomorrow
clear
description
next
slide?
Please.
L
Ok,
sis,
above
all,
is
a
update
of
young
motor
or
connection
yeah,
modos
update
and
another
important
job
I
want
another
important
reversing.
He
is
how
to
use
at
this
young
Mahjoob
how
to
extend
in
this
technology
fixed
to
a
model,
for
example
the
trio
and
mpls-tp
for
trail
I.
Think
our
basic
model
can
you
well
spotted
and
they're
already
have
to
working
group
draft
in
chill
working
group,
a
140,
00
m
and
another
for
one
another.
One
is
a
trio
performance
measurement,
so
that's
and
this
to
draft
they're
all
based
on
our
generic
moto.
L
Another
job
is
how
to
extend
to
some
healthy
p.
I
think
our
original
connection
Iranian
model
can
also
well
spotted
because
a
connector,
because
I'm
healthy
p,
where
I'm
also
down
to
the
emmy
gee
and
I'm
in
structure
and
our
connection,
a
range
model
cambio
described
eight
when
extending
to
you
when
we
want
to
extend,
choose
a
I'm
healthy
p.
We
can
set
I'm,
indeed
name
to
mac,
ID
and
amaze
name
too
sorry,
I'm
didn't
aim
to
globe.
L
Id
and
amazing
them
to
makati
and
MEP
is
named
to
meid,
and
we
also
where
there
as
our
they
are
young
rafting
in
I'm
house,
a
working
group
talk
about
I'm,
healthy,
p,
OEM,
llamado
and
next
type
we'd
like
to
talk
to
the
authors
and
the
clock.
The
mall
comments
to
make
our
basic
module
margin
eric
and
satisfies
a
multi-piece
requirement.
Okay,
say
is
a
connection
de
Matos
update
and
question.
F
J
If
we
try
to
look
at
what
is
the
common
in
OEM
and
the
goal
is
to
use
it
to
facilitate
their
multi-layer
OEM
so
that
their
client
layer
can
benefit
from
their
information
available
from
the
server
layer,
its
know,
two
things
so
the
location
of
test
points
that
define
their
path
and
operation
and
the
state
so
effectively.
The
client
layer
is
interested
for
information
from
the
server
layer
ought
to
help
with
the
localization
of
the
problem,
and
for
that
you
need
to
do
are
to
know
their
location
in
the
network
and
the
state.
J
So
if
their
server
layer
reports
the
error
defect,
then
there
are
client
layer
can
really
attribute
this
defect
to
their
defect.
It
will
find
later
because,
obviously
the
recommended
is
that
certain
correlation
of
their
intervals
between
the
layers
so
that
there
will
not
be
simultaneous
errors
on
a
different
layers.
Detective,
so
I
think
that
we
we
might
try
to
do
some
abstraction
from
the
specifics
of
intervals,
that
being
used
to
do.
J
Detection
or
some
other
particulars
and
look
at
what
is
a
common
for
a
connection-oriented
in
connectionless,
and
that
would
be
a
location
location
could
be
expressed
as
for
connection
oriented
as
a
domain
name,
our
level
and
ID,
or
could
be
as
usually
in
a
tea
and
a
p.m.
pls
as
IP
address,
and
then
operation
would
be
again
very
generic.
If
we
do
continuity
check.
This
is
a
continuity
check.
J
How
and
what
protocol
instruments
there
or
enables
continuity
check,
whether
it's
CFM,
1731
or
BFD,
or
something
else
I
think
that
this
is
a
technology
specific
and
then
the
state
are.
The
state
would
be
up
down
admin
down,
rd
I,
seen
or
something
else,
so
I
think
that
it
may
become
very
compact,
but
that
would
be
information
is
really
what
would
be
necessary
to
communicate
to
their
client
layer.
Om
are
the
state
of
the
current
server
they're.
B
J
J
K
Okay
groaning
everyone,
my
name
is
chimo
and
the
puck
is
not
here
so
I
present
on
behalf
of
haka
and
all
sir.
So
if
you
follow
the
last
idea
meeting,
actually
we
discussed
a
lot
about
this
young
beta
modo
base
model
and
we
agree
to
spirit
that
face
Molly
into
to
java.
So
we
split
these
connections
from
the
base
model.
We
actually
have
a
lot
of
90's
coming
with
pap
guys
and
some
other
problem
that
we
put
them
together
to
come
up
with
new
version
chap.
This
is
a
first
presenter
first
version.
So
next.
K
K
So
we
need
to
try
to
model
how
how
these
tests
ponies
a
gesture,
and
what
can
the
OEM
tour
can
be
used
can
be
applied
on
the
telephone
has
born
and
how
the
test
bond
is
related
to
each
other
at
a
given
layers,
but
don't
cover
how
test
on
the
can
which
domain?
Oh
all,
these
telephone
that
belong
to,
and
so
we
did
actually
is
the
OEM
topological
and
this
om
for
topological.
K
We
are
built
on
top
of
the
negative
logic
in
this
way
where
you
can
actually
to
see
how
the
test
point
to
relate
to
another
test
pond,
and
so
so.
In
this
you
using
this
figure,
we
actually
were
using
the
RPC.
Actually,
the
management
system
can
use
a
PC
to
trigger
the
OM
commander
on
the
Nano
device
and
they
can
trigger
the
test
point
to
send
as
a
oh
em,
commander,
follando,
a
ping
or
chess
root
and
the
cat
has
the
results
back,
and
this
has
a
result.
I
will
report
back
to
the
mansion
system.
K
K
We
will
define
the
Hezbollah
address
and
tours,
and
so
here
les
several
attribute-
we
were
not
highlight,
as
a
test
point
will
represent
the
spawn
address,
that
the
tools
will
indicate
whether
the
OM
two
tours
competes
for
the
on
specific
responder,
and
then
we
also
defined
om
they're.
The
OEM
they
are
can
help
us
to
know
how
Ted
phone
is
rooted
to
another
test
porn
at
different
layers
and
whitey
Ford
will
set
the
OEM
layer
as
a
zero
by
doing
some
cases.
K
So
we
need
to
know
how
the
kelana
layer
is
related
to
the
server
layer,
so
we
will
actually
say
that
oh
em
there
as
may
be
minus
one
and
a
flat
and
a
plus
one,
and
next
we
also
define
the
RPC
and
a
piece
a
we
were
limit
to
the
the
connective
checker
and
pass
revocation
the
Canadian
continued
check
actually
pair
us
how
the
will
tear
us,
the
weather,
the
the
destination
is
reachable.
Another
is
past
history,
the
the
past
history.
K
K
Here
we
give
you
the
usage
of
the
tours
attribute
actually
in
the
manatees
that
we
have
something
about
the
tools
and
whether
we
need
to
enumerate
all
the
tools
so
we
sink,
it
will
be
actually
the
blood
here.
The
we
use
a
toast
container.
These
actually
classify
different
tools
into
several
cooper,
and
we.
K
K
The
next
here
we
summarize
some
disgusting
on
the
menu
list.
Actually,
some
of
the
change
we
has
already
incorporated
into
the
kernel
version,
but
a
summer
was
a
change.
A
wee
wee
has
operated
by
that
we
haven't
have
an
integrated
into
the
kernel
version,
for
example,
for
the
Virgin.
Well,
actually,
we
remove
some
parameter
from
the
base
model,
because
this
is
actually
a
connection-oriented
technology-related
specification,
so
we
remove
such
a
kind
of
parameter.
K
The
office
object
is
not
a
clear
in
the
colonel,
ok
manner.
We
have
some
outline
discarding
with
a
rash
head
and
we
haven't
gotten
his
feedback
on
this.
We
will
people
work
on
this
and
nothing
is
about
the
ipv6
location,
RGV
for
location
parameter.
These
there's
some
suggesting
the
hope
of
these
can
be
collapse
into
when
attribute,
and
we
we
also
we
sink
them.
K
K
Some
some
other
points
that
mean
it
so
that
it's
coming
actually
I
has
already
clarify
in
previous
lies
about
OEM
their
usage
and
tours
usage.
And
if
you
have
any
suggestion
comes-
and
you
keep
next
for
the
next
step,
aware
of
fixed
all
the
open
issue,
we
has
already
discussed
and
and
will
prepare
the
new
revision,
and
we
also
need
of
sorts
in
a
more
feedback
on
this
job
to
help
to
improve
these
connectionist
model,
because
it's
the
first
version
and
we
still
have
space
to
improve.
J
Greg
mirsky
Erickson
so
even
though,
just
to
get
probably
better
understanding
of
your
plan,
so
you
know
that
the
BFD
yang
model
already
being
adopted
by
BFD
working
group.
So
why
not
to
ingest
argument
it,
and
there
is
a
t1
pn
model
in
an
IP
p.m.
working
group
again
adapted
just
adopted
by
the
working
group.
So
would
that
be,
if
anything,
that
more
specific
than
reference
to
existing
model?
Would
that
be
duplication
of
effort.
H
K
Yeah
this
chapter:
actually,
we
we
think-
maybe
you
know
this-
is
separate
issue.
It's
a
separate
chapter.
We
sink
early
for
people
singles.
It
gives
the
necessary
we.
Actually,
we
can
update
this
job
that
we
try
to
get
in
line
with
not
only
be
happy,
but
also
a
large
app
and
also
the
10
when,
anyway,
we
use,
we
idea
actually
in
these.
If
we
can
have
nine
pft
model.
Actually,
we
will
try
to
reuse
group
in
to
find
a
pap
and
clamp
and
by
the
way
we
will
follow
the
the
are
any.
J
Again,
I
think
that
it
would
be
counterproductive
to
have
anything
which
is
the
wine
be
of
the
model
different
from
the
VFD
model
accepted
by
the
working
group.
If
model
that
accepted
by
the
working
group
needs
to
do
some
changes
to
be
Chloe,
usable
or
easy
to
use
in
the
lime
in
a
generic
model,
then
let's
discuss
it
in
a
BFD
working
group.
Yet.
A
The
fact
that
different
working
groups
have
working
group
adopted
versions
of
specific
documented
specific
protocol
doesn't
mean
that
those
are
carbon
stone.
At
the
same
time,
I
do
want
to
clarify
that
the
work
on
protocol,
specific
models
for
BFD,
mpls-tp
and
BLS
peeping,
et
cetera
OEMs
need
to
happen
in
those
working
groups
right.
So
it
does
not
happen
in
line
limeys
charter
to
only
work
on
a
generic
model,
whereas
the
protocol
specific
happen
on
the
different
working
group.
J
M
Hi
so
as
per
Greg's
comment,
we
are
working
with
BF
d
authors,
BFD
young
authors,
the
draft
which
is
adapted
to
the
by
the
working
group
to
see
how
you
know
means
lime
can
be
applicable
to
them
and
yeah.
So
this
is
ongoing
process
and
rashad.
The
is
one
of
the
authors
from
from
the
BFD
yang,
so
we
are
working
with
him
and
mahesh
and
then
we'll
work
with
the
bigger
team
of
Arthur.
N
N
B
Okay,
Ron
bonica,
individual
contributor,
Greg
mirsky,
brings
up
an
interesting
issue
about
the
actual
role
of
this
line
model.
One
role
is
to
be
a
place
where
you
can,
where
the
developers
of
test
mechanisms
can
hang
their
yang
models,
BFD
can
put
theirs
and
trill
can
put
theirs
and
technology
experts
there's
at
no
point
do
we
want
to
be
defining
something
that
is
also
when
there's
so
and
I
think
that's
the
point
that
Greg
was
making
Greg
if
you're,
if
you're
following
no
raise
your
hand.
B
If
that's
the
point,
you
are
at
nail,
there's
a
there's
another
there's
another
side
to
this
coin:
let's
say
technology,
X
and
Technology.
Why
have
exactly
the
same
attribute?
However?
Technology
X
calls
it
fee
and
technology.
Why
calls
it
foo?
Is
that
the
goal
of
this
yang
model
to
abstract
those
two
attributes
put
them
upstairs
someplace
common?
B
This
is
a
difficult
decision
to
make
because
we
may
not
really
understand
best
if
the
two
attributes
are
the
same
and
what's
more,
by
giving
them
a
common
name.
We
may
not
be
doing
anybody
any
good,
because
the
name
may
be
well
known
within
the
site
within
that
technology.
So
yeah
I'd,
ask
a
few
people
to
chime
in
which
way
is
the
right
way
to
go
with
this.
C
But
what
layers?
So
I
would
also
the
first
part
of
your
your
comment,
which
is
this
is
the
reason
why
the
wiki
that
you
mentioned
is
key,
and
ideally,
we
wanted
to
reach
out
to
the
t1
yang
model
people
before
it
wasn't
accepted
as
a
working
document.
This
should
have
been
the
practice
thing
that
this
group
had
to
do.
So
we
want
to
make
sure
we
do
this
for
next
ones.
I'm
happy
to
see
the
BFD
collaboration
right,
but
there
are
more
than
the
50.
I.
I
A
K
A
For
the
working
group,
you
know
whether,
because
so
far
you
have
CC
and
Pat
verification,
yeah
right.
So
its
second
question
that
I
that
I
had,
as
I
was
reading
the
draft
a
couple
of
weeks
ago,
are
you
scoping
the
connectionless
model
to
be
four
active
OEM
only
or
how
you
actually
include
passive
OEM
and
passive
telemetry?
For
example,
yeah.
K
I
think
we
in
a
previous
discarding.
We
think
we
can
support
both.
You
know
active
or
proactive.
We
call
that
hunk
among
of
proactive.
I
will
use
dependent
on
and
we
haven't
get
any
feedback,
whether
we
should
it
choose
only
one
spotter
bhosle.
We
reckon
we
like
to
hear
whatever
giggles
think
about
these.
I.
B
K
Okay,
so
maybe
we
can
take
off
line,
we
I
I,
need
you
better
understand
who
so
I'm,
gonna
I'm
gonna.
Take
that
question
to
the
least.
Actually
we
have
a
separate
job.
We
talk
about,
performs
the
moment.
I
am
aware,
there's
some
other
problem.
The
two
proposed
amplicons
naman,
maybe
if
they
have
interesting,
we
can
work
together
to
say
whether
this
pecans
man
can
be
preceded
in
this.
A
I
M
So
actually
means
for
passive
Oh
am
I
started
looking
into
it.
The
thing
is,
it
will
be
a
bigger
question
to
the
working
group
if
they
are
interested
that
anything
common
of
passive
om
should
come
into
line
bass
rock,
we
can
certainly
propose
it
and
add
the
add.
Those
operational
data
to
the
operational
data
or
near
a
table
in
the
line
based
document
for
performance
looks
like
there
is
some
commonality.
M
K
A
That's
a
great
discussion
to
be
had
on
the
list
and
and
a
scare
I
want
to
make
a
couple
of
comments.
Gene.
You
know
you
have
a
slide
this
one
right
here.
The
discussion
Greek
up,
in
which
your
listing
a
number
of
open
items
I,
want
to
ask
you
to
actually
put
this
in
a
in
an
email
and
shoot
them
to
the
least
that
we
can
actually
discuss
some
other
questions
that
you
have
right.
There
I
think.
K
A
And
then
you
know,
I
also
wanted
to.
You
know,
keep
a
salami
that
this
is
still
a
an
individual
submission
and
individual
draft.
So
I
think,
is
probably
a
good
time
right
now
to
in
a
poll
the
room
and
the
working
group
around
you
know
how
do
we
want
to
proceed
as
a
group
up
with
this
document?
So
you
know
first
I'm
going
to
ask
how
many
people
have
read
the
document.
A
So
these
a
number
of
people
raise
our
hands
for
the
minute
and
the
last
question
that
I
have
I
don't
know
run
if
you
have
any
additional
question.
But
the
last
question
that
I
have
is
whole
thing.
The
document
is
a
good
starting
point
for
actually
that
photographer
hoot
hoot
support
adoption
of
this
specific
document.
I
A
A
A
On
a
couple
of
things
that
we
agreed,
we
agreed
on
progressing
connectionless
and
connection
oriented
separately
as
two
independent
documents.
We
agreed
on
not
progressing
applicability,
documents
are
separate
documents
and
instead
bringing
those
as
different
sections
of
the
model
themselves.
Those
are
two
of
the
key
decision.
The
third
one
is
around
pulling.
The
group
are
on
the
list
about
a
potential
adoption
for
these
connectionless
and
that's
my
notes.
Any
anything,
I'm
missing
anything,
I'm
forgetting.
B
Yes,
reach
out
to
other
working
groups.
Also,
does
anybody
think
we
could
benefit
by
a
group
editing
session
of
the
connection
less
document
in
a
virtual
interim?
So
hopefully
we
could
get
another
version
before
this
and
maybe
even
have
a
last
call
before
the
next
IETF
Andy.
Well,
let
me
ask
the
question:
who
would
be
in
favor
of
a
group
editing
session
in
a
virtual
interim
for
the
connection
less
model
microphone.
A
J
B
I
say:
connectionless,
sorry,
it's
it
I
say
everything
backwards
because
I'm
in
the
other
hemisphere
now
it's
like,
but
who
would
be
in
favor
of
a
virtual
interim,
a
little
group
editing
on
the
connection,
oriented
model
and
hopefully
a
last
call
before
the
next
IETF
ends.
If
you're
interested
in
a
virtual
interim
and
a
virtual
interim,
there
will
be
be
prepared
for,
like
a
group,
editing
session.