►
From YouTube: IETF-CELLAR-20230124-2000
Description
CELLAR meeting session at IETF
2023/01/24 2000
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting//proceedings/
B
D
A
B
B
A
A
A
A
B
A
B
E
A
F
B
A
D
Actually
have
a
meaning,
there
are
Parts
in
it
with
difference,
meaning,
and
this
is
not
what
we
have
in
matrosca
and
it
was
never
like
that
I,
don't
think
we
should
move
it
that
way.
So
basically
the
UniQue
Ideas
we
have
in
matroscare
are
not
actually
you
your
ideas,
so
I
went
back
and
reverting
the
change
that
we
made
to
do
that.
D
So
that's
the
full
request.
I
think
it's
correct.
The
only
issue
is
whether
we
keep
on
naming
them
uuids
or
we
go
back
to
New
IDs
as
before
as
well.
It
might
be
confusing
for
people
if
they're
called
uuids.
They
might
expect
that
they
have
a
special
meaning,
but
then,
if
they
read
the
space,
they'll
see
it's
not
special
meaning.
D
A
A
That
way,
you
get
to
call
them
uuids
and
it
tells
people
how
to
generate
them,
which
is
just
random
unless
you
want
some
other
version,
which
probably
you
don't
time
ordered.
So
some
of
these
are
are
designed,
for
instance,
to
be
time
ordered
so
that
they
will
insert
into
databases
in
the
particular
order.
For
instance,
you
can
sort
them
and
then
there's
version
eight,
which
is
basically
we
don't
know,
do
whatever
you
like.
A
A
D
A
A
So
what
this
means
is
that
we
would
have
to
before
we
started
using
them.
We
would
have
to
have
exhausted
all
the
other
ones
and
yeah.
Then
when
we
went
to
allocate
them,
we
would
know
that
they
were
returned,
and
so
we
might
actually.
You
know
that
point
ask
a
question
like
is
it
has
anyone
seen
such
a
thing,
and
you
know
we
might
get
evidence
that
it's
actually
out
there
and
it
was
act
then
we
might
might
provide
some
like
Telemetry
some
reviews,
the
fact
that
it
might
be
out
there
or.
D
A
B
D
B
D
A
A
C
C
A
Well,
people
tend
to
focus
on
getting
the
decoder
right
because,
once
you
know
the
rules
for
the
decoder,
then
you
can
innovate
on
the
side
of
encoding
within
those
within
that
space
and
every
knowing
that
everyone
can
do
it.
And
that's
what
Jerome
says
here:
I
guess
and
people
sometimes
don't
want
to
nail
down
the
encoder
too
much
because
they
feel
that
it
unnecessarily.
C
B
A
Yeah
so
I
would
say
that's
up
to
this
working
group
to
what
extent
we
we
would
like
to
have
an
example
of
doing
this
or
a
reference
and
I
think
it's
okay,
that
it
doesn't
have
to
be
normative.
I
think
that's!
The
whole
point
is
the
encoding
is,
is
done
which,
with
whatever
the
best
technology
is
right
now
and
as
long
as
the
decoder
can
can
parse
it.
It's
it's
good
right.
C
C
A
Yeah
I
think
you're.
Fine,
too
I
think
they
should
keep
doing
some
minor
minor
edits,
as
as
we
get
you
know
thing
and
into
review.
So
so
what
will
happen
next
is
we'll
get
reviews
from
other
areas
and
some
of
them
maybe
extensive,
and
some
of
them
may
not,
but
and
then
we'll
get
reviews
from
the
area,
directors
and
our
area
director.
B
A
C
A
B
C
A
E
A
F
E
E
A
E
E
F
E
F
I
know,
there's
no,
you
know
not
much
to
discuss
about
version
four
of
ffp1
right
now,
but
I
wanted
to
point
out
there's
a
small
kind
of
wish
list
of
what
could
be
included
in
ffp1
version
4
and
the
issue
tracker
of
the
ffv1
spec
I
think
there's
like
four
or
five
yeah.
It
looks
like
there's
five
items
in
there
right
now.