►
From YouTube: IOTDIR WG Interim Meeting, 2021-03-03
Description
IOTDIR WG Interim Meeting, 2021-03-03
B
Okay,
thank
you
recording
now,
okay,
if
you
go
to
the
minutes,
everyone
should
be
having
the
chat.
Is
the
codemd
link
so
welcome
everyone
to
the
iot
directorate
and,
first
of
all,
we
are
looking
forward
for
your
feedback
through
a
survey.
So
please,
if
you
have
not
filled
it
yet,
do
it
it's
going
to
be
open
until
er
end
of
the
itf.
So
it's
just
that
we
want
to
know
what
do
you
think
about
this
iot
directorate
and
about
the
reviews?
Some
other
information.
So
please
fill
it.
C
Recently
it
has
been
a
badge
of
four
new
rfcs:
those
are
the
address,
protected
naval
discovery,
backbone,
router
and
the
two
fragmentation
related
rfcs,
and
then
there
are
working
group
documents
which
are
all
in
advanced
stages.
One
is
the
deadline.
Time
draft
in
the
rfc
editor
queue.
Then
there
are
two
documents
which
have
been
evaluated
by
the
isg.
These
are
ipv6
over
nfc
and
ipv6
mesh
over
ble,
and
then
there
are
two
other
active
working
group
documents
quite
advanced
as
well.
C
A
I'm
not
responsible
for
this
group
right.
This
is
the
other
eric
the
californian
one,
not
the
virgin
one.
Even
if
the
blue
sky
is
here
today,
it's
the
plan
was
to
close
it
kirsten
yeah
recognize
your
voice.
The
plan
was
in
the
past.
I
don't
know
the
situation
right
now,
but
as
far
as
I
know,
yes,
the
plan
is
to
close
it
and
the
wikileaks
could
stay
dormant
right,
pretty
much
like
a
six
dish
for
one
one
year,
two
years
before
beginning
close
and
it
once
even
closed.
A
E
G
Hi,
marco,
here
since
november,
we
published
rfc
8974
used
to
be
known
as
stateless
clients
was
very
much
needed
by
sixties
too.
Otherwise
we
have
14
documents
in
the
group,
but
half
of
them
are
very
advanced
or
even
essentially
done
especially
three
are
approved.
Two
are
under
your
last
call
as
we
speak.
Two
are
under
shepherd
write
up
plus.
We
have
two
documents
that
past
working
group
called
with
a
few
open
points
left
and
we
meet
next
week
and
we
scheduled
already
in
next
series
of
six
bi-weekly
meetings
starting
end
of
april.
H
H
H
On
top
of
all
these,
we
have
made
the
progress
with
with
with
our
further
documents.
The
security
document
is
is
getting
really
finalized
like
hopefully
getting
to
the
rfc
editor.
Very
soon,
I
find
an
approval
from
the
isg
and
we
had
one
of
the
documents.
The
bounded
latest
document
at
working
group
last
call
just
recently
passed.
H
A
major
next
step
to
be
done
is
the
oem
work,
which
is
still
in
progress,
and
still
still
there
is
work
to
be
done.
We
are
expecting
to
have
a
framework
document
for
oem,
which
is
not
not
working
group
document
yet
and
derived
from
it
analogous
to
the
data
plane
we
we
are.
We
have
already
two
working
group
documents,
one
for
mpls
om
and
one
for
ipom
to
address
the
specific
aspects
of
the
two
different
data
planes.
H
A
very
new
work
based
on
our
recent
recharter,
relatively
recent,
like
some
time
middle
mid
last
year,
is
a
control
airplane
draft,
which
has
been
recently
adopted
by
the
working
group
and
that's
the
main
new
aspect
in
in
in
the
new
charter
control.
Airplane
includes,
centralized
and
distributed
control,
plane
approaches
as
well
as
the
management
main
aspects.
That's
why
the
new
name?
I
Hi,
this
is
hank
yeah,
so
iot
ops
has
its
first
hour
session
next
week.
All
of
course,
are
welcome.
Cozy
and
astf
conflicts
have
been
removed,
luckily
through
secretary
and
so
for
now
we
are
fully
packed
it's
just
an
hour
because
I
think
it
was
just.
It
was
very
lucky.
Lucky
hits
that
we
got
this
hour.
B
B
J
Hi
hi,
so
I
already
updated
the
kodi
md.
We
have
one
draft
which
is
somewhat
with
the
isg,
although
it
it
was
on
the
telechat
and
was
withdrawn,
so
this
alternative
elliptic
curve
representations.
I
believe
there
is
another
iesg
meeting
today
where
it
will
be
discussed
so
we'll
find
out
what
happens
with
that.
J
There's
also
the
minimal
esp
document
which
completed
the
working
group
last
call
and
is
basically
waiting
for
the
shepherd
write
up,
and
I
contacted
zen
cow
to
see
if
he
can
do
the
shepherd
write
up.
I
haven't
heard
back
yet
the
tcp
usage
guidance
document
was
approved
by
the
isg
and
is
now
with
rfc
editor.
J
While
I
was
preparing
the
notes
for
this
meeting,
I
looked
this
draft
ietf
helvix
cellular
has
been
in
the
in
the
rfc
queue
for
now
1884
days.
I
guess
it's
still
not
in
in
ietf
terms.
It's
not
probably
still
not
a
record.
I
think
the
only
blocking
draft
is
the
resource
directory,
so
hopefully
this
will
progress
soon.
J
K
F
L
So
I
put
some
updates
on
the
wraps,
I'm
hoping
we
can
now
issue
a
working
last
call.
There
was
a
lot
of
activities
on
the
architecture.
Draft
were
the
remote
integrity.
Verification
draft,
which
is
like
a
tpm
based
profile
for
at
the
station,
has
been
done.
I've
done
the
last
review.
We
we
closed.
The
working
group
group
last
call,
but
as
I
was,
writing
up
the
shepherd
write-up
there's
a
lot
of
dependencies
on
other
drafts
in
within
rats,
and
there
are,
I
think,
two
that
we
haven't
even
adopted.
L
They
eat
draft
they're.
Actually
a
couple
of
people,
I
believe
doing
implementations
and
so
we're
looking
to
do
some
early
ayanna
assignments
there,
but
the
draft
is
continuing
to
evolve.
Obviously,
the
same
thing
with
the
chara
draft:
that's
the
at
the
stations
for
tpn
using
yang,
as
well
as
the
interaction
models
that
draft
we
adopted
prior
to
the
november.
L
B
B
M
Yeah,
I
can
talk
to
it
so,
by
the
way
this
week
is
the
ietf
hackathon.
There
is
a
project
going
on.
I
just
pinged
the
people
to
add
it
to
the
hackathon
wiki,
since
it's
not
up
there
doing,
teep,
which
then
uses
suit
and
rats,
and
so
part
of
the
hackathon
this
week
is
to
have
experimenting
with
teep
using
suits,
so
that's
great
to
see
actual
projects
starting
to
make
use
of
things
and
test
in
terms
of
the
documents,
the
suit
architecture
sitting
in
the
rfc
editor's
queue.
M
The
information
model,
also
known
as
or
also
containing
the
threat
model,
is
in
the
iesg
and
next
week
we'll
talk
about
the
how
to
address
the
iesg
commas.
To
get
that
one
through
the
manifest
format
is
getting
close
to
working
group
last
call
we
expect
or
hope
to
start
that
after
ietf
we'll
see
how
that
goes,
there's
an
open
call
for
adoption
on
secure
reporting
of
update
status.
M
So
how
do
you
securely
report
back
the
results
of
attempting
to
do
an
install
or
an
update?
And
then,
finally,
there's
also
a
proposal
to
adopt
a
a
mud
document
for
suit
manifests,
which
was
discussed
last
ietf
meeting,
in
terms
of
which
group
is
the
best
group
and
it
was
agreed
that
suit
was
the
best
group
to
cover
it
and,
of
course
we
would
like
to
adopt
that
too,
but
that
one
requires
a
charter
update
and
so
we're
in
the
process
of
working
with
the
id
on
charter
update
stuff.
L
L
L
N
Yeah,
thank
you,
so
I
can
take
this
one
so
inhibiting
archie.
We
have
had
recent
work
on
three
different
documents
and
all
of
these
will
be
on
the
agenda
for
our
summary
meeting
at
the
idf
110,
but
the
three
requirements
are
the
iodh
challenges
and
functions,
secure,
bootstrapping
and
then.
Finally,
a
more
recent
draft
called
a
taxonomy
of
operational
security
considerations
for
manufacturing,
installed,
keys
and
trust
anchors.
N
I
know
for
the
first
two
documents:
there
have
been
something
going
on
a
bit
longer
at
the
research
group,
in
particular
the
iot
extract.
We
think
it's
getting
ready
for
publication
and
the
secure
bootstrapping.
We
think
it's
not
getting
mature
enough
for
adoption,
and
the
last
draft
is
much
more
recent,
but
will
be
now
presented
at
the
rg
meeting.
N
Regarding
that
work
we
have
identified
it's
all
good
to
be
synchronized
with,
for
example,
rats,
anime
and
iot
ops
groups
on
the
security
documents,
because
clearly
we
have
their
a
lot
of
common
interests.
We
have
already
been
discussing
some
of
the
chairs
and
and
present
I
sent
those
on
the
mailing
list.
N
There
are
also
five
other
documents
that
have
been
recently
submitted.
Those
have
not
been
yet
discussed
on
the
mailing
list.
We
did
approach
the
authors
to
ask
what
they
what
they
are,
are
what's
their
plan
regarding
them.
But
if
those
titles
sound
interesting
to
you
go
ahead
and
check
out
the
details
from
the
data
tracker
and
then
we
have
had
this
long-running
wishy
activity.
N
It's
been
recently
focusing
quite
a
bit
on
supporting
the
1dm
asdf
work.
We
had
very
good
collaboration
there
good
progress,
and
we
had
a
wheelchair
online
meeting
yesterday,
where
we
were
discussing
the
way
way
forward.
With
wishing
also,
we
are
have
this
ongoing
hackathon
activity,
the
astf,
which
hackathon
that
was
mentioned
earlier
from
tinklingrt.
N
Oh
sorry,
so
we
see
for
those
who
who
haven't
heard
the
acronym
before
is
work
on
iot
semantic
and
hyper
media
interoperability.
So
it's
it
started
as
a.
It
was
a
works
of
four
years
ago.
Maybe
it's
been.
It's
been
a
while
and
really
focusing
on
like
what
we
can
work
on
semantics
and
hyper
media
in
order
to
enhance
interoperability
for
iot
settings.
N
B
B
E
O
So
one
data
model,
one
dm
stands
for
one
data
model
and
the
goal
when
we
started
in
late
2019
is
to
normalize
iot
information
models
across
the
industry
in
in
multiple
verticals.
So
not
a
very
ambitious
goal.
Clearly,
but
that's
what
we
wanted
to
do
and
we
had
a
lot
of
sdos
involved.
So
we
thought
that
was
a
worthy
goal.
Our
progress
is
pretty
good.
The
first
thing
we
needed
to
do
is
create
a
common
language
which
we've
done
now
and
that
is
being
standardized
in
the
asdf
working
group.
O
O
We
also
find
that
we
are
we're
going
to
be
expanding
the
scope
of
the
information
models.
We've
had
some
interest
from
the
community
around
electronic
data
sheets
and
also
another
example:
textile
manufacturing
equipment,
they're
looking
for
a
common
language,
but
there
are
numerous
others
where
they're,
basically
looking
for
a
common
information
model
and
sdf
seems
to
be
close
to
what
what
they're
looking
for.
So,
we
also
have
some
some
iso
iec
activities
in
a
couple
of
groups
sc41-
and
I
didn't
mention
that
and
I'll
write
that
in
sc41
and
there's
another
one.
O
O
Yeah
so
iot
schema.
We
started
quite
a
bit
earlier
back
around
2000
2016
after
the
iotsi,
the
semantic
interoperability
workshop.
That
was
an
iab
workshop
back
in.
I
think
it
was
2016
and
in
march,
so
we
started
iot
schema
with
the
buy-in
of
schema.org.
There
were
some
folks
we
worked
with
in
google
dan
danby,
notably,
but
also
some
other
folks,
and
the
goal
is
to
provide
an
extension
to
schema.org.
So
users
of
schema.org
have
access
to
iot
categories
that
they
can.
O
You
know,
get
measurements
from
iot
devices
and
maybe
control
things
through
semantic
interfaces
provided
on
web
pages
like
the
way
schema.org
has
been
used
and
our
progress
is.
We've
got
about
20
or
30
example,
models
that
are
all
aligned
with
the
same
ontology
pattern
that
we
use
in
one
data
model
and
that's
common
across
many.
Some
of
the
wishy
work
has
shown
that
we
really
have
some
common
patterns
across
all
iot
models,
semantic
models,
and
at
that
level
and
we've
pretty
much
adopted
those
in
iot
schema
as
well.
O
So
it
would
kind
of
bring
together
the
world
of
schema.org
in
the
world
of
iot.
Those
are
also
used
in
what
w3c
web
of
things
plugfest.
So
with
our
our
sensor,
rdf
format,
they're,
they're,
really
friendly
to
thing
description
and
are
are
have
been
pretty
much
the
canonical
semantic
anchors
for
thing
descriptions.
If
you
want
to
say
this
is
a
light
bulb
or
this
has
color
control,
or
this
turns
something
on
and
off
we
point
to
schema.org.
O
Usually,
of
course,
we
can
point
to
one
dm
and
other
places
as
well,
but
basically
we're
now
ready
to
deploy
this
extension
point
in
schema.org
we've
worked
through
some
fairly
large
architectural
issues
with
the
way
iot
data
works
versus
the
way
schema.org
was
set
up
and
we're
ready
to
do
that.
Danby
is
ready
to
just
sort
of
add
some
stuff
to
schema.org,
so
we
can
start
testing
this
out.
O
D
Well,
I
I
wrote
something
so
we
we
will
have
a
segment
at
the
fingertime
research
group,
summary
meeting
about
the
report
from
w3c
river
of
things,
so
they
are
very
active.
They
have
a
candidate
recommendation
deadline,
two
months
from
now,
so
that
they're
really
busy
nailing
things
down
and
if
you're
interested
in
in
data
modeling
for
iot,
this
is
really
an
activity.
You
want
to
watch.
B
A
And
if
you
don't
mind,
give
me
a
consequence
to
thank
and
welcome
the
two
newcomers
in
our
group,
which
is
christians
and
logan
adam,
even
if
it's
not
here
right
now,
there
is
also
a
topic
that
might
be
interesting
by
ted
lemon.
I'm
taking
you
by
surprise
that,
but
your
stub
network
may
be
applicable
as
well
to
iot.
P
I
had
to
had
to
find
the
mute
button.
I
wasn't,
I
wasn't
expecting
you
to
do
that,
but
sure
yeah,
so
so
there's
two
drafts
that
there's
actually
quite
a
few
drafts
that
are
going
on,
but
but
those
two
are
probably
particularly
interesting
back
when
we
were
trying
to
figure
out
how
to
connect
meshes
to
to
ip
networks.
P
Or
you
know
the
usual
things
that
that
that
you
do
in
a
document
review.
I
think
that
would
be
very
helpful.
The
idea,
basically,
is
that
iot
networks
generally
aren't
transit
networks.
You
don't
usually
route
packets
through
them
and
therefore
they're
stub
networks.
That
means
they're
they're
connecting
to
infrastructure,
but
but
that's
all
they're
doing
they're
not
they're,
not
doing
anything
special,
because
that's
a
fairly
restricted
use
case.
It
gives
you
some
some
simplifications
that
make
it
possible
to
automatically
connect
stub
networks
to
infrastructure
in
ways
that
that
are
useful.
P
The
the
base
use
case
that
we
that
we
approached
was
just
like
okay,
so
I've
got
you
know
a
threat
accessory
that
needs
to
be
connected.
It
needs
to
be
discoverable
on
my
home
network
same
way
that
a
wi-fi
accessory
is
discovered
discoverable
in
my
home
network.
I
need
to
be
able
to
reach
it
from
my
home
network,
and
so
how
do
I
make
that
happen?
And
we
use
a
number
of
ietf
protocols?
There's
a
service
registration
protocol,
that's
being
worked
on
at
dnssd.
P
O
Well
not
specifically,
but
is
there
anyone
here
that
can
report
this
back
to
the
zigbee
alliance
project
chip
because
I'm
afraid
they're
going
to
go
off
and
do
a
whole
bunch
of
different
stuff
to
solve
the
same
problem
and
mostly
about
the
routing
but
also
the
advertisement
stuff?
There's
there's
a
bunch
of
I
don't
see.
I
don't
see
any
of
the
folks
like
yeah,
okay
anyway,
maybe
I'll
try
to
do
that.
P
O
O
P
O
P
Yeah
I
mean
I
should
say
this
is
work
that
so
so
this
this
code
is
actually
running
in
the
homepod
mini,
that's
code
that
I
wrote,
and
it's
also
there's
there's
some
there's
an
independent
implementation
by
google.
So
this
is
fairly
mature
at
this
point,
in
the
sense
of
like
it's
being
used
again,
doesn't
mean
that
we
can't
make
changes
if
we
need
to
and
for
those
who
are
actually
work
for
companies
that
are
members
of
the
chip
alliance
or
the
thread
group.
P
P
Two
drafts
in
the
omnet
milling
list
right-
that's
that's
correct,
they're
they're
be
they're
going
to
be
discussed
in
the
home
networking
group.
I
think
it's
on
friday
of
next
week,
yeah
and
if
people
are
interested
in
the
service
discovery
aspect
of
it,
that's
also
being
discussed
in
the
same
the
dnssd
and
home
that
are
meeting
at
the
same
time
and
sharing
that
that
that
time
slot
so
so
the
service
registration
and
also
the
advertising
proxy
service
registration
is
basically
a
way
to
do.