►
From YouTube: NMRG Interim Meeting, 2020-09-25
Description
NMRG Interim Meeting, 2020-09-25
A
Its
primary
goal
is
to
promote
development
of
research,
collaboration
and
teamwork
in
exploring
research
issues
related
to
internet
protocols,
application
architecture
and
technology.
So
this
is
really
to
distinguish
from
ietf
still.
We
follows
etf
policies
with
respect
to,
for
instance,
patents,
core
conduct
or
privacy
aspect.
So
this
is
an
extract
of
the
iitf
policies
and
if
you
want
to
have
more
information,
you
have
the
different
reference
to
documents
available
on
this
page.
A
So
please
be
well
in
form
of
this
information,
and
by
agreeing
to
that,
you
will
comply
with
the
iitf
policies,
a
quick
heads
up
on
how
we
proceed
for
the
meeting,
so
the
sessions
are
being
recorded.
When
you
end
up
speaking,
please
keep
yourself
muted
to
allow
for
some
inconveniences
and
in
the
chat
window.
Please
type
rh.
If
you
want
to
take
the
floor
to
to
make
a
comment
and
the
chairs
will
manage
the
queue
okay,
please
state
your
name
and
be
conscious
and
precise
for
much
of
time.
A
A
After
the
session
the
webex
recording
will
be
made
available.
Usually
it's
on
the
ietf
youtube
channel
and
that's
it
so
agenda.
This
is
point
number
one
I'll
just
have
a
follow-up
slide
with
the
future
meetings,
but
then
we
will
start
with
technical
discussion
agenda.
Item
number
two
is
for
status
on
the
research
challenges
in
ai
for
network
management.
Document
jerome
will
give
us
this
status.
Then
agenda
item
number
three
status
on
internet
classification
by
olga
item
number
four
status
on
ibn
concepts
and
definitions
alex.
A
So
those
two
internet
draft
are
research,
group
documents,
draft
and
then
agenda
item
number
five.
We
will
have
a
discussion
led
by
jefferson
on
the
ibn
use
cases
we
like
to
develop
in
the
research
group,
and
we
will
finally
have
patent
item
number
six,
which
is
a
open
discussion
slot
to
address
any
updates
or
communication
on
the
other.
Ids
of
the
group
also
discuss
a
bit
potential
participation
in
the
next
ietf
hackathon
and
a
discussion
on
some
scouting
topics.
We
would
like
to
suggest
for
upcoming
meetings.
A
A
A
A
What
will
be
the
mode
of
operation
for
nmrg
will
be
to
continue
with
virtual
meetings
on
a
period
basis,
use
mailing
lists
for
technical
discussions
and
also
collaborative
platforms.
We
have
a
bit
more
activity
now
on
the
nmg
github,
thanks
to
the
the
two
research
group
documents,
and
we
have
also
google
docs.
B
B
I
don't
know
okay,
so
so,
basically,
now
we
have
a
kind
of
a
good
set.
I
don't
put
here
again
all
the
different
challenges
that
have
identified,
but
you
have
already
a
good
set
of
challenges
that
can
be
a
bit
categorized
or
classified
into
different
sets,
based
on
the
morality
to
artificial
intelligence
itself,
more
on
the
enabler
from
it
or
something
like
that.
So
we
have
this
list
that,
of
course,
you
can
consult
in
the
document.
B
B
B
A
B
Incomplete
but
already
that
you
put
a
bit
more
structure
into
the
document,
because
currently
it's
mostly
a
list
of
challenges,
I
don't
don't
have
so
much
to
say
about
the
document
itself,
I'm
just
regarding
next
step.
You
have
mostly.
I
know
that
I
will
promise
you
and
I
didn't
do
yet-
is
to
organize
this
dedicated
meeting
to
work
on
this
document
and
yeah.
So
I
will
do
it
next.
B
September
is
over
almost
so.
Yes,
that's
it
for
me,
so
no
big
update,
of
course,
if
people
want
to
steal.
The
document,
of
course,
is
open
for
league
challenges
and
nothing
is
close,
so
you
can
check
and
add
something
if
you
want
and
then
that
you
will
move
from
another
move
to
a
draft
draft
format
for
continuing
to
the
document,
and
that's
it
from
my
side,
hello,.
A
B
B
So
usually
it's
quite
accepted,
of
course,
because
I
mean
draft
is
not
considered
as
a
publication,
so
I
mean
in
terms
of
plagiarism.
You
should
be
able
to
do
so
as
well.
Of
course
may
have
some
reviewers.
That
said
that
it
would
even
be
published
if
you
submit
such
a
paper,
but
normally
it's
okay,
because
I
mean
it's
like
when
you
publish
archive
or
something
like
that,
so
I
think
two
options
are
compatible.
It
will
really
depend
on
the
content
you
are
able
to
produce.
B
A
Okay,
so
just
to
repeat
what
java
mentioned
that
this
is
a
completely
open
project
or
document,
you
have
the
link
in
the
slide
or
you
can
address
the
cheers
for
that.
It's
you
can
contribute
only
also
with
just
reviewing
or
providing
comments.
We
have
the
shared
talk
usable
so
far.
So
if
you
have
interest
in
that
topic,
please
reach
out
to
your
home
myself
or
directly
by
updating
the
document.
A
D
So
I'll
just
present
the
status
of
the
intent
classification
draft
today
and-
and
these
are
the
authors
of
the
draft,
so
the
draft
just
I'll
give
a
brief
intro
for
those.
If
there
are
some
people
who
joined
today,
who
were
not
here
before,
but
we
discussed
this
chart
several
times
just
to
introduce
the
goals
so
that
we
know
what
we
are
talking
about.
D
The
system
to
provide
for
the
intent
so
therefore,
this
draft
is
here
to
bring
some
clarity
into
what
intent
network
intent
represents
for
different
stakeholders,
and
we
are
doing
that
by
means
of
classifying
different
types
of
intents
into
dimension,
dimensions,
different
solutions,
users
and
intent
types.
So
this
classification
would
going
forward
ensure
that
we
have
a
common
understanding
and
it
can
be
used
to
potentially
identify
the
the
scope
and
priorities
for
some
pox
research,
open
source
projects
and
individual
projects
that
we
have.
D
The
important
thing
is
to
say
that
we
want
to
be
aligned
with
the
the
other
draft
that
would
be
presented
by
alex
later
and
so
that
both
drafts
could
become
the
foundation
for
any
intent,
related
topics
and
and
where
we
could
use
some
common
understanding
about
what
intents
are,
what
different
types
of
intents
mean,
who
are
the
intent
users,
etc?
This
is
the
link
for
the
draft
for
those
who
don't
have
that
link.
D
So
so
the
summary
of
the
state
is
really
the.
We
received
a
lot
of
the
comments
and
what
we
did
is
based
on
those
comments.
We
did
a
classification
classification
based
on
complexity
based
on
the
sections,
and
we
assigned
all
the
comments
to
the
co-authors
to
your
editors.
So
we
have
now
the
list
of
ownerships
for
all
the
comments
and
we
are
doing
working
on
those
comments
and
addressing
them
as
we
go.
So
we
also
created
the
git
project.
D
For
the
draft
here
is
the
link
we
added
the
version
zero,
which
was,
which
is
the
version
that
is
the
research
group
draft.
We
added
it
to
the
git
and,
via
we
created
version,
one
which
is
now
currently
being
worked
on.
All
the
comments
like
we
had
a
different
complexity,
zero
one,
two,
three
and
all
the
comments
of
low
complexity
have
been
already
addressed
and
other
comments
of
complexity.
Two
and
three
are
in
progress
and
we
are
hoping
to
finish
them
and
to
submit
version
one
in
october.
D
So
this
is
someh.
This
is
the
history
of
our
draft.
You
can
see
here
sorry,
you
can
see
here
that
sorry
just
put
a
pointer.
Probably
you
can
see
here
that
in
july
we
had
a
draft
adopted
and
up
and
then
we
have
38
comments
now
that
we're
addressing-
and
these
are
the
waters
common
daughters.
We
have
six
different
common
daughters,
and
this
is
some
statistics
that
we
have.
D
So
these
are
the
comments
that
have
been
up
completed.
Of
course,
I
won't
go
through
them,
but
just
to
say
that
we
addressed
19
of
them
for
the
complexity,
one
and
zero.
There
is
still
one
that
is
in
progress
and
the
common
daughters
have
been
contacted.
So
so
please
come
and
talk
to
us.
If
any
one
of
you
is
at
the
meeting,
please
review
it
and
say
and
and
let
us
know
if
they
are
dressed
satisfactory.
D
D
Professor
jefferson
is
kind
of
looking
at
some
comments.
In
the
section
one
and
he
did
kind
of
complete
part
of
his
comments
and
our
design
progress
pedro
is
also
looking
at
us.
He
he
has
three
comments
to
address
and
they're
in
progress
and
and
huawei
is
looking
at
additional
comments,
mostly
from
alex
sorry
alex
will
will
contact
you
about
these
ones.
We
left
them
for
at
the
end.
So
so
these
are
the
progress.
D
Some
of
the
comments
that
we
would
be
addressing
in
next
few
weeks,
so
conclusion
and
next
steps,
so
we
do
want
to.
We
are
working
through
git
through
different
branches.
Different
authors
are
addressing
different
comments
and
we
are
merging
it
all
editors
identified
and-
and
I
think
we
are
on
our
way
to
have
a
all
comments
addressed
in
in
in
october.
D
A
I
I
do
have
a
few
observations.
First,
thank
you
very
much
to
the
team
for
making
this
work.
I
mean
he.
We
had
the
first
version
of
the
document.
First
call
for
research
group
adoption
and
then
you
made
might
address
the
content
of
the
work
to
make
it
successful
in
the
second
call
for
research
group
adoption.
So
thank
you
for
that.
D
Oh
okay,
beginning
like
I
don't
think
we
would
have
it
at
the
beginning.
I
think
it
would
take
probably
a
few
more
weeks
so
but
I'll
come
back
to
you
like
at
the
moment.
Some
of
the
comments
would
be
addressed
by
the
end
of
september,
but
for
some
it
looks
like
it
may
be
october
time
frame.
So
we
didn't
get
all
the
estimates
for
all
of
the
comments
yet,
but
we
like
the,
I
think,
the
the
plan
was
maybe
closer
to
the
third
week
of
october
or.
D
A
A
E
A
A
F
That's
fine,
okay,
so
yeah
so
so.
This
is
just
a
very
brief
status
update,
actually
we're
feeding
following
following
the
other
draft.
Basically,
as
olivia
mentioned,
that
the
two
are
pretty
much
moving
in
tandem,
so
this
basically
concerns
the
update
on
intent-based
networking
concepts
and
definition
on
this
one
we
just
recently
just
a
week
ago,
or
so
we
posted
a
a
draft
update.
Basically,
we
will
yeah
with
with
a
few
updates
for
one.
F
Basically
is
when
we
we
expanded
section
six
section:
six
is
the
one
that
defines
the
the
the
different
intent
based
networking
functions,
so
baby
provided
more
details
on
each
of
those
functions,
and
this
also
entails.
Basically
earlier
we
had
a
longer
list.
We
really
expanded
some
of
this
into
new
subsections
for
the
intent
fulfillment
and
the
intended
assurance
main
main
categories.
F
F
F
Intent
fulfillment
assurance.
We
now
have
basically
different
subsections,
so
we
are
really
basically
the
main
things
I
guess
to
discuss
the
next
steps,
and
where
should
we
go
from
here?
We
do
believe
that
the
document
is
is
reasonably
stable.
Now
I
mean,
although
there
have
been
a
few
changes
or
a
few
updates
to
the
draft,
and
nothing
is
really
major
or
so
so.
Therefore,
actually,
I
think
we're
getting
into
the
into
the
face
where
it
will
be
good
to
assess
readiness
for
progression
to
go
to
the
next
steps.
F
F
And
then
the
question
is
also
what
the
target
dates
would
be,
I
think,
actually,
in
the
original
charter
for
this
working
group,
itf
109
was
mentioned
as
a
target.
I
think
actually
this
is
doable
and
realistic,
but
this
is,
of
course
something
that
we
would
want
to
have.
The
would
like
to
ask
the
feedback
from
the
working
group
and
from
the
chairs
on
and
that's
all
I
have.
A
B
Views
going
forward,
I
was
speaking
because
I
was
mute
on
my
phone,
not
on
the
application.
I'm
sorry
yes,
so
so
for
that.
Yes,
as
a
as
you
said
that
the
idea
now
is
to
to
assess,
if
the
is,
the
draft
is
ready
for
iot
review,
and
so
this
will
go
through
the
for
requesting
feedback
from
the
an
energy
participant
in
mailing
list.
B
So
I
think
we
share
with
you
the
procedure
and
the
checklist
for
doing
so.
So
there
are
some
steps
to,
of
course,
to
to
go
through,
and
so
the
first
one
is,
as
I
said,
is
to
have
a
review
of
the
document
by
the
group.
So
mostly
here
that
should
be
go
through
the
mailing
list,
adding
feedback
and
yeah.
Then
it
depends
really
on
what
the
what's
really
the
feedback
you
receive,
because
you
were
asking
for
the
date
at
the
time.
B
It's
a
bit
hard
to
say,
because
it
really
depends
on
the
feedback,
of
course,
and
the
time
you
will
need
to
address
yeah.
Thank
you
for
this
from
showing
the
page
and
so
yeah.
So,
basically,
if
you
think
as
a
if
all
the
other
things
are
they're
ready
as
also
then
you
can
go
through
the
feedback
from
the
group.
B
Of
course,
fbtc
is
saying
that
it
is
for
irg
review
and
then
we
will
with
it
based
on
feedback
and
we
can.
We
can
also
see
what
will
be
the
the
timeline,
then
is
it
clear
for
you
alex
and
I
think,
for
the
audio
type
longer
during
the
draft,
so
without
the
battery
in
all
those
process,
but
yeah
first
step
is
review
by
the
group.
F
A
A
A
To
highlight
that,
is
it
very
an
individual
condition,
an
individual
scientific
position
from
the
participants
of
the
research
group,
or
is
it
a
wider
community
condition
and
also
to
make
sure
that,
as
we
propose
this
content
to
irsg,
but
also
after
that
to
the
entire
community,
there
is
a
good
quality
of
what
we
provide.
So
this
is
why
I
think,
there's
a
responsibility.
A
F
B
A
Okay,
it's
a
good
remark,
jefferson,
so
now
also
in
rtf,
there
is
document
shaper
assigned
most
of
the
time
it's
one
of
the
risks
of
group
chair.
I
cannot
do
that.
As
john
mentioned
from
our
informal
discussion
with
jerome.
So
far
german
took
this
role
when
we
I
mean
really
enter
this.
This
discussion
this
process.
A
What
I've
seen
recently
I
mean
in
the
last
couple
of
years
or
a
year
that
the
process
has
been
much
more
fluid
between
the
research
group.
The
irsg
iesc
reviews
also
conflict
reviews,
so
things
are
tend
to
to
be
a
bit
more
quick.
Nevertheless,
we
know
that
it.
It
will
take
a
bit
of
time
to
go
through
all
this
stuff,
but
your
remark
is
correct.
That
headed
as
a
key
role
for
the
good
progress
of
the
document.
A
A
E
E
E
E
E
So
the
goal
of
having
some
use
cases
to
assess
the
quality
and
completeness
of
specifications
and
intent-based
assessments,
functionalities
in
experimental
sessions
so
and
I'm
bringing
some
some
ex
best
experience
on
this
kind
of
use
case
to
have
a
use
case
on
autonomic
networking
buff
at
iatf
90
and
at
that
point
automatically
is
something
which
was
was
okay.
Let's
say
address
by
the
the
several
meetings
by
the
nmrg
and
after
this
use
case
box,
we
have
as
a
as
we
know.
E
But
the
fact
is
that
when
we
started
to
talk
about
having
some
use
case
on
autonomic
network-
and
I
think
that
maybe
we
can
use
this
as
some
kind
of
a
template
for
use
cases
of
ibm,
we
discuss
a
template
for
present
in
this
use
case,
which
can
can
can
show
more.
How
can
I
say
homogeneity
when
we're
discussing
when
we
were
discussing
at
that
time
and
in
regarding
the
the
the
use
case
for
automatic
networking?
E
The
template
have
some
problem
statement,
after
that
they
attended
user
and
administration
experience
parameters,
information
interaction
into
other
device.
So
we
started
to
to
write
down
some
internet
drafts
that
have
these,
at
least
in
order
to
to
present
a
more
consistent
view
of
of
use
case
for
networking
at
that
point.
E
E
Also,
there
is
the
work
from
sabini
hendri
amazi,
which
is
regarding
5g
nintendo
based
5g
iot
network
slice
and
also
there
is
a
work
from
amina
bodendir,
which
is
network,
slicing,
lifecycle,
automation
and
I'm
not
claiming.
That
is
that
these
are
just
the
only
ones
that
at
this
point,
are,
are
can
be
considered
as
use
case
for
ibm,
but
also
is
something
that
we
can.
E
E
Maybe
we
can
think
of
invite
people
that
have
other
intent,
ideas
in
different
working
groups
or
research
groups
to
present
at
nmrg
meetings?
Maybe
it's
something
that
we
can
confirm
in
regard
to
to
bring
more
people
to
to
contribute
on
that,
and
the
last
question
is:
how
can
we
move
this
conversation
forward,
maybe
in
the
main
list
or
in
having-
I
don't
know,
maybe
in
the
past
the
nmrg
had
some
some
specific
meetings
for
for
autonomous
and
also
for
ibm.
So
you
can
start.
E
A
G
Yes,
I
I
think
that
the
what
has
been
proposed
by
jefferson
is
a
probably
a
very
a
good
way
to
follow.
So
in
my
particular
case,
I,
apart
from
the
the
draft
that
has
been
commended
by
jefferson,
I
also
moving
forward
another
one
about
interconnection,
and
both
of
them
are
potentially
different.
I
mean
different
in
into
the
realization
of
the
intent,
so
probably
having
this
kind
of
template
would
be
useful
to
to
understand
the
different
dynamics
further
than
than
the
intent
itself.
A
Because
we
have
some
documents
already
internet
drafts
that
are
on
the
use
case,
would
it
be?
I
saw
that
maybe
in
other
research
group,
for
instance,
they
bring
several
use
cases
together
in
a
single
document
so
that
it's
more
not
comprehensive,
but
at
least
all
together,
it's
sometimes
easier
to
see
a
bit
the
differences.
The
use
case
consideration
are,
I
would
say,
I'll,
discuss
together
through
this
document.
A
Is
it
a
possible
way
that
we
have
we
keep
this
individual
use
cases
so
that
this
is
more
the
the
solution
to
to
the
use
cache
problem
and
that
we
can
maybe
have
a
kind
of
collective
or
collection
of
use
case
use
cases,
documents
that
will
more
address
the
comparison
of
them
and,
and
maybe
lessons
learned
or
what
we
want
to
take
out
of
these
use
cases
for
the
design
of
the
ibn
architecture.
Again,
what's
a
bit
your
views
on
that
and
really
often,
but
just
raising
the
point,
luis.
G
Thank
you
lauren.
It
may
be
probably
at
this
stage.
I
think
that
would
be
better
to
to
keep
the
use
cases
apparently
in
different
documents.
The
the
reason
why
I
think
in
this
way
is
because
the
the
expertise
I
mean
the
implications
further
than
the
intent
are
very
specific
for
for
different
topics.
G
No-
and
I
think
in
the
two
that
I
have
mentioned
before,
the
transport
is
lysine
and
the
interconnection,
so
probably
it
would
be
easier
to
to
work
separately,
maybe
defining
these
common
parts
and
maybe
potentially
later
on,
to
try
to
to
merge
all
the
use
cases
one.
We
have
a
common
structure.
I
guess
this
would
be
my
my
view,
but
for
sure
it's
only
my
my
view.
E
E
G
G
E
D
A
A
So
this
can
be
a
mapping
exercise
not
necessarily
inside
the
internet
classification
document,
but
at
least
as
a
tool
for
the
for
the
research
group.
As
for
the
scope
for
me,
I'm
really
in
between
two
to
two
positions.
First,
I
really
would
like
to
encourage
anyone
willing
to
work
on
use
cases
to
bring
them
to
the
research
group.
A
I
really
see
values
in
getting
into
some
pragmatic
approaches
for
how
ibm
networks
would
work,
so
I
would
like
to
really
keep
it
as
open
as
possible,
but
I
also
understand
a
bit
your
question
that
if
I
mean
if
the
scope
is
very
wide
or
very
heterogeneous,
then
it
it
will
be
a
bit
challenging
when
we
want
to
reach
identify
common
functionalities
or
commonalities
between
the
use
cases.
This
will
be
more
difficult
and
more
challenging,
but
today
I
think
we
have
a
few
examples
of
nice
use
cases
in
in
previous
discussion.
A
D
E
Yeah,
I
I
think
it's
it's
important
to
to
discuss
the
scope,
because
regarding
the
nmrg
charter,
I
think
it's
pretty
wide.
So
maybe
it's
challenging
to
to
address
this
in
a
document,
so
maybe
at
first
we
can.
We
can
discuss
along
with
a
potential
template
which,
which
it's
called
we
are
interested
in.
So
I
I
agree
with.
E
A
I
would
really
be
really
interested
that
we
discuss
not
necessarily,
I
would
say,
just
a
format
because,
okay,
this
is
just
a
format
but
more
what
kind
of
outcome
we
expect
to
see
from
the
use
case.
Okay,
so
the
use
case
could
be
what
they
are,
but
if
we
can
agree
on
or
describe
what
we
think
will
be
important.
A
Beyond
purely
I
will
say,
scope
of
the
use
case,
that
is
to
solve
a
specific
problem.
I
think
we
have
also
to
discuss
a
bit
how
to
put
some
sections
some
expectations
of
of
what
would
be
what
needs
to
be
delivered
by
the
different
use
cases
without
being
too
constraining
on
again
what
I
think
the
use
case
should
be
a
bit
self-contained
and
to
live
by.
A
A
A
So
we've
gone
through
the
item:
number
five
for
ibn
use
cases.
Next
one
is
a
bit
this
slot
for
open
discussion.
So
I
I
will
leave
the
floor.
I
don't
know
exactly
who
from
the
room
is
here,
but
we
have
a
point
for
other
ids.
I
don't
know,
for
instance,
louise
or
any
others
here.
If
you
would
like
to
make
a
quick
announcement
or
whatever
on
on
your
id
or
if
not
I
mean
we
can
move
on
just
checking
a
bit.
What's
the
status
for
the
other
active
work,
individual
draft.
A
A
A
There
was
several
research
participants
that
take
take
part
in
the
academy
for
a
few
different
topics,
and
especially,
we
had
a
good
feedback
from
from
those
participants,
especially
the
team,
from
from
walter
and
and
and
all
his
colleagues,
about
the
interest
of
this
this
activity.
So
we
are
raising
again
this
question
now,
if
we
want
to
make
a
kind
of
follow-up
for
for
the
next
ietf
and
especially.
A
What
will
be
the
nature
of
of
this
activities,
because
it's
a
kind
of
collective
approach
for
the
idea
of
hackathon
we
can.
It
could
really
be
a
team
of
individual
teams
of
participants
without
necessarily
making
it
connected
with
energy,
so
it
really
depends
at
which
granularity
we
want
to
do
that,
and
also
the
timing.
I
mean
we
did
that
for
ietf
108,
because
initially
it
should
have
happened,
face
to
face
and
we
wanted
to
to
be
able
to
bring
people
locally
to
madrid,
even
if
it
was
virtually
organized.
A
We
managed
to
make
it
useful
for
the
participants
here.
The
question
is
whether
we
want
to
keep
this
iitf
meetings
hackathon
as
kind
of
milestones
to
plan
some
collaboration
work
or
if
it
would
be
more
relevant
to
not
necessarily
track
this
milestone
and
help
each
of
the
teams
to
to
plan
their
work
as
they
see
fit.
A
A
A
A
A
So
I
was
wondering
if
this
topic
of
the
residual
configuration
could
be
something
we
can
bring
to
the
floor
of
an
upcoming
enemy
meeting
and
try
to
frame.
It
first
have
some
presentation
on
the
context.
What
could
be
the
research
questions?
Actually
what
the
problem
is
and
then
see,
then
investigate
discuss
among
us.
What
could
be
interesting
potential
solutions
to
that?
A
A
A
D
I
think
you
can
look
at
it
from
two
perspectives.
You
know
you
can
look
at
it
from
intent
perspective
and
then
you
can
look
at
it
from
network
configuration
perspective
and
in
both
cases.
Potentially
there
is
a
interesting
research
to
be
done,
but
in
in
one
case
for
the
intent
driven,
you
have
to
kind
of
somehow
present
all
of
those
configuration
as
a
you,
in
fact,
do
the
classification
of
intense
and
generation
of
intense
potentially
from
the
network.
D
C
So
the
this
is
the
unboxing
which,
on
on
that
topic,
is
that
the
configuration
is
ephemeral
and
it
can
be
when
you
translate
the
intent
to
a
actually.
When
you
use
an
intent,
I
prefer
to
use
provisioning
information
when
you
use
the
intent
to
provision
the
service
into
a
network,
you
create
a
state,
and
then
you
you
try
to
keep
that
state
according
to
the
intent
that
was
defined
by
the
operator
or
customer
or
whoever
was
the
who
was
the
requester
of
the
intent
to
be
put
translated
into
the
network.
C
The
whole
idea
there
is
that
that
you
can
always
delete
once
the
in
intent
is
removed,
for
whatever
reason
that
you
delete
the
whole
provision,
you
remove
the
whole
provisioning
information
except
the
basic
management
information
from
the
network
devices
that
everything
what
is
related
by
by
the
provisioning.
The
configuration
is
pretty
much
fixed
and
it's
persistent,
but
everything
else
is
ephemeral
and
you
can
something
goes
wrong
on
the
device
you
delete
and
you
create
based
on.
You
know,
based
on
the
overall
information,
what
you
have
and
the
last
known
state.
You
will
reprovision
that
device.
C
C
So
here
the
main
here,
the
main
question
is
what
is
your
system
of
record
and
you
have
to
reconcile
the
network
with
your
system
of
record
and
by
trying
to
put
everything
in
this
case.
If
you
have
a
manual,
if
you
have
a
manual
intervention,
do
that
manual
intervention
through
the
system
of
record
on
the
device,
because
in
that
case,
everything
was
here,
is
treated
as
ephemeral
and
can
be
deleted
at
any.
A
A
Do
you
know
if
there
are
it's
just
kind
of
good
engineering
practices
or
good
good
designs,
or
if
they
are
a
bit
more,
I
mean
it
starts
to
have
also
technical
specification
or
best
practices,
type
of
documentation
to
say,
we'd
like
to
guide
a
bit
more.
This
I
mean
to
to
to
describe
what
could
be
the
key
elements
and
the
typical
processes
or
procedures
to
follows
in
order
to
make
sure
that
you
don't
get
into
problematic
cases.
C
Yeah,
so
the
the
the
main,
the
main
thing,
what
I've
seen
from
several
operators
that
are
in
in
that
are
advancing
that
area.
They
decide
what
is
their
system
of
record
and
they
then
reconcile
everything
with
that
system
of
record
everything.
What
is
not?
There
is
treated
as
ephemeral
and
can
be
deleted
and
they
are
with
more
automation.
C
C
Doing
things
as
their
souls
doing
their
things
in
the
old
ways,
but
the
more
advanced
are
saying
it's
I
will
decide.
Was
it
was
it?
How
can
I
get
my
basic?
How
can
I
get
my
basic
operational
network
up
and
running
and
after
that,
I'm
treating
all
the
information
as
ephemeral.
One
of
the
goals
for
resconf
originally
was
to
create
ephemeral,
ephemeral
overlays
on
the
network
that
were
used
to
deploy
services.
C
Then
rescoff
added
as
well
the
persistent
state
and
have
changed
from
the
original
intention
and
to
research
that
especially,
what
could
be
interesting
is
with
the
network
slicing
and
doing
doing
either
soft
network
slicing
or
hard
network
slicing
is
the
I
have
a
you.
Can
you
can
then
view
network
in
multiple
layers?
C
What
would
be
minimum
set
for
the
network
to
be
functional
to
start
hosting
other
overlays
on
top
of
that
and
how
to
and
then
how
to
yeah?
So
I'm
I'm
to
see
what
what
could
be
a
like
a
mains
problems
that
we
are
seeing
with
some
of
the
operators.
In
that
case,
when
they're
doing
the
foundation
part
and
what
are
considered
overlays
and
yeah.
So
there
are
some.
There
are
some
issues
when
you're
booting
up
device,
and
then
there
are
some
trust.
C
A
A
As
I
said,
to
frame
the
topic,
maybe
give
maybe
someone
from
academia
to
give
us
a
bit
from
the
angle
of
techniques.
What
could
fit
into
this
to
these
problems,
and
then
we
discussed
openly
in
the
research
group.
Is
it?
Do
we
want
to
go
further?
Is
it
more
a
problem
for
iitf,
then
maybe
transfer
that
to
them,
or
is
it
really
some
interesting
questions
that
you
would
like
to
investigate
further
in
energy,
but
at
least
agree
on
the
topic
and
see
in
in
one
meeting
gathered
the
right
information
to?
C
C
C
There
I
I'm
just
starting
out
at
the
very
basic
when
they're,
just
starting
up
their
foundational
network,
to
build
it
up,
bring
it
to
a
state
how
to
bring
it
to
a
state
that
the
devices
can
among
themselves,
that
you
have
your
network,
that
you
have
your
management
network,
your
internal
management
network
up
and
running
in
a
in
a
secure
way.
So
there
are
some
things
that
worth
researching
before
passing
it
to
the
itf
to
solve
the
technical
details.
A
D
A
A
Okay-
let's,
let's
try
to
to
follow
up
on
that
thanks
for
for
the
good
comments,
we
reached
the
end
of
the
agenda
of
the
point
that
we
agreed
to
discuss,
but
we
still
have
some
time
we
can
finish
earlier,
which
will
be
good
for
energy
for
once,
but
we
can
also
open
the
floor
to
maybe
some
other
topics
or
comments.
You
would
like
to
raise
now
anything
else
you
would
like
to
discuss
before
we
close
the
meeting.
A
Okay,
so
I'd
like
to
thank
you
for
attending
the
meeting,
thanks
for
the
presenters
on
the
different
updates,
and
this
final
discussion
on
new
topics
have
a
good
rest
of
the
day
and
we
post
some
information.
If
we
will
organize
a
next
interim
in
october,
we
we
have
to
see
it's
relevant
or
not
and
are,
as
I
said,
we
already
have
planned
for
a
next
station
in
iitf109.