►
From YouTube: IETF-RASPRG-20230516-1100
Description
RASPRG meeting session at IETF
2023/05/16 1100
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting//proceedings/
A
A
B
B
What
we
aim
to
do
during
this
meeting
was
because
we
had
such
a
jam-packed
session
during
the
last
ITF.
We
thought
we
have
a
bit
of
more
of
a
concrete
work
session
to
see
what
we
can
Converge
on
and
how
we
can
make
the
most
of
this
proposed
working
group
and
then
also
ensure
that,
with
this
proposed
working
group,
we're
bringing
together
researchers
to
also
ensure
that
our
research
is
as
beneficial
as
possible
for
the
community
and
so
that
we
can
try
to
connect,
needs
and
demands.
B
And
it's
great
to
have
you
all
here,
so
we
really
hope
to
have
this
session
as
interactive
as
possible
and
not
as
another
presenter
listen
style
as
as
we
had
during
the
last
meeting.
So
to
do
that,
we
set
up
a
preliminary
agenda.
So
let's
do
some
agenda
bashing
before
to
go
that
before
we
go
there.
Is
there
anyone
who
is
interested
in
note-taking.
B
Yes
No
Maybe,
okay,
then
we
will
try
to
do
it
and
try
to
do
it
as
the
they
will
try
to
do
it
from
the
recordings
as
well
good.
So
let's
continue
we
let's
go
to
some
agenda
bashing.
We
you
see
on
the
screen
a
preliminary
agenda
that
was
set
before
that
was
shared
with
you
all
before
do
people
have
any
things
they
would
like
to
add
to
the
to
the
preliminary
agenda.
B
B
To
go
through
these
points,
and
the
first
of
it
is
that
we
go
to
a
list
that
we
have
as
chairs,
went
through
a
list
of
research
questions
that
different
projects
have
asked
and
that
people
are
actually
have
been
shown
interested
in
the
past.
This
is
not
meant
to
be
an
a
full
list,
but
it
will
be
very
curious
to
hear
what
other
things
you
are
interested
in
either
researching
or
having
being
answered
by
researchers.
B
So
what
we're
now
looking
at
is
topics
that
are
trending
per
standard
development
organization
area
or
working
group
to
understand
what
hotly
debated
drafts,
email,
threats
and
words
are
to
understand.
Who
are
the
main
people,
how
long
people
stay
engaged,
and
this
should
give
you
an
idea
of
what
we
have
already
looked
at,
because
you
can
already
see
here
below
linked
to
some
a
technical
limitations,
how
they've
been
analyzed
and
what
we
could
try
to
make
more
accessible
through
a
dashboard
potentially
in
this
in
this
research
group.
B
D
D
So
it
does
a
company
or
a
participant
having
intellectual
property
interests,
change,
how
they
participate
in
ntf
and
change
that
it
get
developed,
I
think
the
sort
of
broader
question
there
is
also
about
the
other
outputs
that
participants
in
the
ETF
might
have.
So.
We've
got
lots
of
academic
participants
who
write
papers
and
then
also
participate
in
standards
process.
Can
we
sort
of
match
those
outputs
together?
D
B
That's
super
interesting
Stephen
thanks
so
much
for
the
suggestion.
I've
also
added
one
thing
that
you
haven't
said,
but
so
I
added
so
I
I
wrote
it
as
influence
of
non-standard
documents
on
standard
setting
processes
such
as
patents,
research
papers
and
public
policy
documents.
Yeah,
yeah
I
think
that
will
make
sense.
That's
nice,
that's
nice,
and
would
you
think
what
do
you
think
would
be
the
best
way
of
gathering
those
documents
where
you
think
there
will
be
more
ml
style
or
do
you
think
we
would
select
them
from
particular
databases.
D
So
just
my
my
sort
of
final
point
on
the
the
sort
of
patent
side
of
things
commercialization
side
of
things
is:
do
the
different
governance
models.
The
the
different
stos
have
alter
that
Dynamic
right.
So
the
ITF,
for
example,
has
a
stated
strong
preference
for
standards
that
are
free
from
intellectual
property
claims.
Does
that
alter
how
people
participate
in
the
type
of
standards
that
are
developed
completely.
B
D
B
B
B
A
E
First
time
on
the
platform,
thanks
about
the
patent
databases,
Pat
stat
has
a
lot
of
bibliometric
or
metadata
about
patents,
not
so
much
the
texts
for
the
text
of
patents
when,
as
far
as
U.S
patents
are
concerned,
patents
view
is,
is
very
comprehensive.
It's
all
machine,
readable,
all
U.S
patents
granted
1976
and
later
so
you
get
a
picture
of
the
last
almost
50
years
of
U.S
patents,
the
EPO,
that's
the
European
patent
office
sells
their
their
full
database.
E
The
text
of
machine,
readable
texts
of
all
patterns
for
nominal
fee
of
800
Euros,
that's
more
or
less
just
put
everything
on
a
hard
drive
and
mail
it
to
you.
The
UK
IPO
now
has
a
way
of
has
a
has
a
licensed
program
where
researchers
can
license
can
get
a
license
to
the
machine,
readable
texts
of
all
UK,
IPO
patents
and
I.
Think
Canada.
The
Canadian
patent
office
makes
patent
text
the
full
text
of
patents
also
available
through
their
website.
E
E
The
question
of
are
are
declared
patents
and
within
standard
development
organizations.
Is
there
really
a
patent
that
sort
of
backs
that
that
backs
that
declaration
and
how
similar
or
standards
protects
to
patent
texts
and,
and
vice
versa?
So
there's
a
little
bit
of
work
on
going
there,
but
I
think
there's
a
lot
more,
a
lot
more
stuff
that
can
be
done.
B
B
B
E
E
They
cite
other
patents
when
a
when
a
patented
when
the
when
the
invention
in
a
patent
Builds
on
some
other
patented
invention
you're
for
you've,
asked
forced
to
cite
another
patent,
but
there's
also
category
non-patent
literature
differences
in
a
lot
of
patents,
site
ITF
drafts
and
for
paper
we
were
curious
to
see
sort
of
how
many
ITF
drafts
and
rfcs
that
just
need
both
the
individual
versions
of
the
of
the
IDS
and
eventually
the
RFC.
How
many
are
cited
in
patents
and
how
often
they're
cited
in
patents.
B
That's
fascinating.
That's
a
really
cool
work.
Yeah
we
should
yeah.
We
should
definitely
have
that.
Maybe
maybe,
as
you
try
to
continue
to
present
something
in
the
next
meeting,
when
we're
focusing
lesson
discussion,
this
is
great
Ignacio.
Can
you
hold
a
look
at
the
chat
because
it's
really
a
bit
hard
to
do
everything
at
the
same
time,
I
see
Colin
is
in
the
queue
Colin.
Please
commit.
G
F
All
hear
me
very
well
so
on
a
completely
different
topic,
because
I
know
very
little
about
patterns.
It
strikes
me
looking
at
this
list
of
questions
that
that
we
can
maybe
sort
of
categorize
them.
Somehow
you
know
some
of
them
are
straightforwardly.
You
can
straightforwardly,
derive
the
answer
from
the
raw
data.
F
F
Others,
you
know
things
like
sentiment,
analysis
and
so
on.
There
are
a
lot
more
complex
to
build
and
some
of
these
questions
you
need
to
answer
the
earlier
ones
before
you
can
do
the
later
ones
and
so
on.
So
it's
maybe
sort
of
thinking
about
how
to
structure
the
work.
So
we're
not
all
just
redoing
the
sort
of
Baseline
trivial
analysis
and
we
can
move
on
to
the
more
interesting
questions
but
sort
of
relatively
quickly
but
might
be
useful
exercise.
B
Yeah,
that's
a
that's
a
great
suggestion,
Colin
and
I
think
there's
definitely
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
categorization.
That
can
be
done
here
also
be
super
curious
to
hear
from
others
which
question
they'd
like
to
see
answered.
So
this
is
almost
like
a
tell
us
what
you
want
us
to
research
and
we
can.
We
can
try
to
get
you
the
answer
or
try
to
get
people
to
get
you
the
answer
and
in
what
way
you'd
like
to
have
it
I
see.
We
have
luckily
some
great
people
from
leadership
present.
H
Yes
actually
I
mean
there
are
many
questions
that
we
discussed
from
time
to
time,
where
more
data
would
be
needed,
but
something
that
we
discussed
lately
was
kind
of
understanding
who
our
active
participants
are
like
what
they
are
doing,
how
they
engage
and
who
they
are.
Basically,
that's
kind
of.
Maybe
one
thing
that
would
be
interesting
for
us.
H
H
Like
say
one
more
thing
about
this,
so
we
have
some
numbers
about
people
who
engaged
in
mailing
this
and
come
to
meetings
and
whatever.
But
this
is
a
very
broad
set
of
people
right.
Some
of
the
people
just
come
to
a
meeting
and
they
monitor
and
they
might
not
actively
work
or
whatever.
So
we
would
be
definitely
interested
when
we're
talking
about,
like
anything,
that's
related
to
meeting
organization
about
what
are
the
different
needs
of
different
group
of
participants,
and
so
there
was
this
question
about
what
is
actually
an
active
participant.
H
C
Whereas
most
of
the
work
that
the
everybody
is
doing
is
look
is
done
by
looking
into
the
mail
list,
one
thing
that
could
be
done
is
that
the
IDF
collects
surveys
and
other
data
that
could
be
exploited
and
potentially
linked.
So
maybe
one
thing
to
consider
would
be
what
of
that
information?
What
of
that
data
could
be
released,
maybe
in
a
more
anonymized
way,
so
other
people
can
try
to
tackle
the
questions
that
you
were
just
mentioning
by
linking
together
those
pieces
of
data
foreign.
A
A
C
That's
exactly
what
I
mean
so,
for
example,
if
you're
trying
to
look
at
a
very
active
participants,
that's
relatively
easy
because
they
are
very
active
right.
So
they
have
a
lot
of
females.
But
if
you
have
people
who
have
joined
a
meeting
and
they
have
never
participated
in
the
mail
list,
there
is
nothing
that
can
be
said
with
the
data
that
is
typically
available.
C
H
I
think
even
the
active
participants,
it's
not
like
super
easy.
For
example,
if
I
look
at
myself,
I,
don't
think
I
send
a
lot
of
emails
to
open
public
mailing
lists,
but
I
do
a
lot
of
work
on
GitHub
and
these
kind
of
things
right
so
like
I,
think
one
metric
isn't
enough,
and
that's
also
like
one
of
the
questions
to
actually
figure
out
what
what
are
active
participants
doing.
A
H
B
B
I
see
that
Sebastian
in
the
chat
asks
whether
there
is
a
list
of
GitHub
repositories
associated
with
the
ietf
and
the
ITF
working
groups.
Do
we
have
that
I?
Think,
like
the
rule
is
now
that
you
add
the
Secretariat
as
co-owner
of
the
repository
so
inversely?
Would
it
mean
that
if
we
look
at
where
the
Secretariat
is
involved,
those
are
the
ietf
GitHub
repos?
Or
is
that
not
easy
to
say
like
that?
I
There
is
arbitrary
metadata
key
value
pairs
that
can
be
associated
with
any
working
group,
research,
group
or
document,
and
there
are
I
think
like
15
or
20
defined,
which
include
the
GitHub
repo
link.
So
it's
easy
relatively
easy.
If
you
have
access
to
the
data
tracker
say
like
you've,
cloned
it
and
you're
you're
running
it
locally,
you
can
make
SQL
queries
that
find
everything.
That's
got
one
of
those
resources
available.
I,
don't
think
that
I
don't
think
it's
available
through
the
API.
B
If
people
I
think
we
will
try
to
do
a
bit
of
an
initial
categorization
and
then
share
it
on
the
list
and
then
probably
maintain
it
in
the
and
see
what
I'm
gonna
do
now,
research
group
GitHub
repo
and
then
we
can
also
accept
pull
requests
for
people
with
new
questions
and
new
suggestions
for
for
categorizations.
Do
people
have
other
suggestions?
B
What
we
should
put
in
the
research
group
GitHub
repo,
because
there
are
a
lot
of
different
possibilities,
but
if
we
start
populating
it
right
away,
it
might
also
become
a
bit
messy
things.
We
thought
about
were
bibliographies
of
of
papers
that
are
actually
looking
at
standards
data
and
maybe
categorized
that
also
a
bit
per
per
discipline.
So
there
are
a
lot
of
Economics
papers,
a
lot
of
legal
papers.
B
I,
don't
see
too
many
comments
either
in
the
chat
or
hands
up
so
I
think
people
will
people
are
okay
to
see
how
we're
going
to
populate
the
research
group,
GitHub
repo,
then
on
to
ethics
and
privacy.
I
think
there
is
a
bit
of
a
bit
of
a
bit
of
a
discussion
between
or
a
question
post
by,
Sebastian
benthal
that
has
been
answered
by
Jay,
but
maybe
Sebastian
you
wanna.
You
want
to
outline
your
questions,
your
concerns
and
interests,
Visa
ethics
and
privacy
of
it.
J
Hi
it's
very
early
in
the
morning
here
and
so
I've
been
participating,
lonely
in
the
chat
and
maybe
because
it's
so
early
in
the
morning
I,
don't
recall
my
questions
about
ethics
and
privacy.
Very
clearly,
I
do
think
they
were
addressed
in
the
mailing
list
and
if
I
have
any
further
questions,
I'll
follow
up
foreign.
B
Thanks
so
much
Sebastian,
so
I
think
the
answers
for
by
Jay
were
pretty
clear
for
our
work.
We've
also
done
a
gdpr
analysis,
so
under
the
European
data
protection
regulation
and
for
research,
there
are
quite
considerable
car
accounts,
especially
if
you
see
ITA
ITF
standard
setting
as
policy
making,
and
it
has
nothing
an
impact
on
on
the
society
in
general
and
see
how
our
work
as
research,
so
I
think
there
should
be
quite
some
basis
for
us
to
do.
A
kind
of
analysis
on
this.
B
F
Main
concern
is,
is
what
data
we
can
release
as
it's
processed
here
you
know,
I
mean.
Obviously
the
data
tracker,
for
example,
on
the
mailing
list
archives
make
a
lot
of
data
available
if
we're
deriving
sort
of
processed
results
from
this
data
here,
for
example,
a
a
set
of
annotated,
mailing
list
messages
of
sentiment,
analysis
or
roles,
or
something
like
that.
B
G
B
F
B
Yeah
exactly
I
can
I
can
share
that
I
can
share
the
analysis
and
they,
the
the
company
that
helped
us
have
done,
have
done
it
pro
bono
for
us.
So
we
can
also
like
go
through
a
bit
more,
but
I
also
think
that
the
data
that
Jay
provided
was
really
quite
helpful
yeah.
It
will
definitely
I
see
Sebastian
in
the
queue
I'm
sure
he
wants
to
contribute
to
this
Sebastian.
J
J
Instead,
the
publicness
is
declared
in
the
privacy
policy,
and
this
is
a
slight
discrepancy
between
say,
European
standards
of
privacy
regulation
and
you
know
maybe
anglophone
American
versions
where,
where
even
if
something
is
public
in
Europe,
it
can
still
be
purpose
restricted,
because
you
need
a
legitimate
basis
for
processing
and
and
I.
Think
that's
what
my
question
was
about
before.
J
So
one
thing
that
would
make
things
extremely
clear
would
be
if
the
Privacy
statement
said
something
about
the
purpose
of
res
of
the
data
being
released
is
for
research
purposes,
but
I.
Don't
think
that
actually
that's
what
the
intention
of
the
ietf
so
so
to
some
extent
it's
a
matter
of
clarity
within
jurisdiction,
but
maybe
there
is
actually
a
point
of
ambiguity
here
that
should
be
followed
up
on.
B
G
G
The
purposes
are
there
they're,
just
not
they're
written
in
a
way
that
is
different
from
the
way.
We
might
sometimes
see
it
in
European
things
where
it
says
you
know,
we
will
use
it
very
specifically
for
this
this
and
this,
but
the
purpose
is
there
clearly
that
it
is
about
operating
in
an
open
and
transparent
fashion
in
it
is
about
that
we're
going
to
make
it
public
to
do
these
things
and
that
we're
going
to
you
know.
G
Well
it
just
as
it
says
there
it's
it's
about
that,
and
so
it's
it's
very
very.
According
to
the
lawyers,
multiple
different
lawyers,
gdpr
experts
and
other
things,
this
is
a
very
defensible,
no
gaps
missing
privacy
statements.
We
didn't,
you
know
we
haven't
drafted
it
internally.
This
has
been
drafted
by
lawyers
the
so
the
the
other
thing,
though,
to
to
note,
is
that
it
does,
as
in
you
know,
rely
on
the
public
interest
carve
out
as
well
about
the
the
public
research
part
of
things.
G
For
that,
and
there's
no
attempt
in
here
to
talk
about
things
that
go
beyond
that.
So
you
know
like
the
the
your
discussion
about
commercialization
of
any
data
or
something
we're.
That's
not
what
the
ITF
does.
So
it
doesn't
need
to
say
you
know
that
talk
about
that
in
that
type
of
way,
so
I
I,
if
there
are,
if
there
are
specific,
can
we
do
this
type
questions
I'm,
always
happy
to
go
and
get
advice
on
those
but
I'm
it
redoing.
G
This
privacy
statement
is
an
exceptionally
complex
thing
to
do,
because
the
number
of
people
that
have
to
be
involved
in
negotiations
and
all
of
those
kind
of
things,
and
because
of
the
level
of
you,
know
legal
advice,
we've
got
about
it
and
other
things,
and
just
because
we
regularly
get
some
sort
of
challenge
or
something
like
that.
You
know
people
have
to
look
at
it,
so
I'd,
rather
not
attempt
to
do
that.
G
If,
if
somebody
would
like
a
or
you
know
a
better
explanation
of
how
that
the
European-
you
know
way
of
saying
these
are
the
purposes
and
listing
bullets
you
know
reflect
is
relates
to
this
I'm
happy
to
go
and
ask
someone
to
to
produce
that
a
bit,
but
but
I,
don't
think.
There's
a
discrepancy
here.
I
particularly
need
to
fix.
B
Thank
you
very
nice,
so
I
read
that
as
Steady
As
She
Goes
and
we
continue
with
the
work
and
we
just
keep
in
close
contact
with
Jay
and
the
others
and
keep
closer
considering.
But
it's
very
nice
that
that
so
many
people
are
looking
with
us
on
this
work
and
that
we
can
contribute
it
forth
and
that
the
lawyers
have
provided
their
advice.
That's
very
welcomed
and
thanks.
B
So
then,
I
wanted
to
go
a
bit
to
to
Stephen
and
Sebastian
just
to
head
to
the
exploration
of
possible
joint
work
where
we
currently
are
and
what
possible
next
steps
are
and
how
we,
as
a
community,
can
contribute
to
that.
Can
you
ask
either
Stephen
or
Sebastian
how
or
I
see
how
work
is
progressing
and
how
we
can
contribute
to
it?
D
D
Author
recommendations,
that's
going
well
and
we're
getting
ready
to
contribute
that
code
to
the
repository
that
you
discussed
earlier
in
terms
of
other
possible
joint
work.
I
wonder
if
it's
a
case
of
trying
to
bring
in
some
of
the
data
that
we've
collected,
you
contribute
it
to
the
dashboard
project,
but
you've
got
ongoing.
B
B
D
B
D
B
J
J
J
B
B
B
And
I
think
so,
both
the
both
Ignacio
and
I
as
the
code
church
will
not
physically
be
present
in
San
Francisco,
but
we
do
have
a
session
and
I
think
we
will
be.
We
will
be
there
online,
so
we
can
continue
to.
We
can
try
to
organize
one
talk
and
continue
to
to
work
on
this.
Maybe
we
have
this.
The
research
question
Etc
a
bit
more
formalized,
so
we
can
present
it
to
community
and
get
I
get
a
bit
more
question
a
bit
more
input
on
questions.
B
I
also
know
of
more
projects
such
as
Michael
belzo,
who
has
been
working
on
this,
but
I
don't
see
him
in
this
meeting.
So
it
was
also
really
nice
to
get
their
papers
and
tools
and
students
plugged
into
this
work.
So
we
can
continue
around
the
community
building
and
being
joint
work
forward,
and
maybe
we
can
then
also
do
some
work
as
a
presentations
on
the
data
sources
that
we've
done.
B
B
No
okay,
yeah,
so
I
think
we'll
be
missing.
Quite
some
people
doing
the
work
in
San
Francisco
so
that
one's
probably
going
to
be
virtual
and
then
we'll
see
they
will
probably
have
another
interim
work
meeting
to
keep
the
finger
on
the
pulse
and
continue
the
work
that
we're
doing
and
and
move
things
forward.
Colin.
B
B
I,
wouldn't
I
would
not
be
against
that
and
if
agenda
slots
are
a
are
a
scarce
commodity,
I'd
be
happy
to
do
that.
One
of
the
one
of
the
downsides
with
it
is
that
we
would
get
a
bit
less
visibility
of
the
ongoing
work
and
we
do
want
want
to
attract
people
and
their
questions.
So,
but
maybe
we
could
also
find
other
ways
of
doing
that.
What
are
your
thoughts
about
that.
F
F
Certainly
a
scarce
commodity.
If,
if
there's,
if
we
can
make
a
good
good
use
of
the
meeting,
you
know
if
there's
a
you
know,
someone
who
will
give
an
interesting
presentation,
then
yeah,
absolutely
you
should
use
the
the
agenda
slot.
So
if
it's
just
going
to
be
a
working
meeting
with
the
the
current
set
of
people,
then
that
can
perhaps
be
done
in
in
a
a
better
time
zone
a
different,
not
necessarily
during
ATF
week.
B
I
B
Cool
I
completely
got
the
message:
let's
retract
the
agenda
slot
and
give
it
to
happy
people
that
are
there
in
person
and
will
schedule
an
intern,
but
for
the
interim
I
then
try
to
invite
some
more
external
standard
researchers
that
can
help
us
inform
our
work,
and
then
we
can
also
show
them
the
research
questions
that
we're
working
on
in
a
categorized
way.
They
share
their
interests
and
approaches
in
a
bit
like
that.
So
we
have
a
work
meeting,
but
also
with
outside.
B
C
B
I
B
That
that's
a
very
nice
offer
Rich
that
we're
going
to
take
you
out.
Thank
you
very
much.
Wow!
That's
such
a
nice
emerging
consensus
gets
me
all
this
warm
glowy
feeling.
So,
while
we
are
at
the
happy
warm
glowy
feeling
I
think
we
are
through
the
the
points
we
wanted
to
discuss
and
we're
eight
minutes
before
the
hour,
so
that
leads
us
to
aob
or
any
other
business
I
see
Jay
Jay,
please
come
in.
G
Okay,
can
you
hear
me
now
a
bit
better?
Okay,
I'm
gonna
turn
off
video
to
say
sorry,
I,
copper,
internet
connection,
just
yeah
in
New
Zealand.
Of
course,
I
have
gigabit
Ethernet,
but
there
you
go
so
here
in
data
tracker,
the
developers
are
redoing
the
API
to
use
graphql
that
will
allow
for
a
much
faster,
much
more
direct
querying
of
it.
G
B
Well,
if
that
happens
without
me,
hearing
it
even
better
so
I'd
like
to
thank
you
all
for
a
very
productive
and
very
clean
meeting.
I'll
give
you
back
six
minutes
of
your
day.
Thank
you
all
very
much
for
this
excellent
meeting.
Thanks
a
lot
Ignacio
for
running
it
like
this
will
be
we'll
be
back
with
the
notes
and
the
summary
and
the
follow-ups
we
agreed
on
thanks.
So
much
all
have
a
great
day.
Happy
happy.