►
From YouTube: IETF-TOOLS-20220913-1800
Description
TOOLS meeting session at IETF
2022/09/13 1800
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting//proceedings/
A
A
A
Alice
on
the
call
genie,
if
you
could
carry
back
to
the
rpc
my
suggestion
that
we
dropped
the
rpc
production
blocking
issues
from
the
regular
agenda,
for
this
call,
we've
effectively
been
covering
those
at
the
what
had
been
the
cmtn
is
now
the
rpap,
and
I
think,
for
this
call
all
we
need
to
do
is
raise
a
red
flag.
If
there's
a
major
issue,
that's
going
to
be
disrupting
the
production
change,
but
basically
discussion
of
the
blocking
issues
as
we're
taking
care
of
elsewhere.
A
For
ftp,
we
still
have
not
taken
the
actions.
The
final
actions
that
we
said
we
would
as
published
in
the
rfc
about
ftp
roman,
has
a
document
that
he
has
run
by
the
community
and
by
the
iesg.
That
would
become
the
tombstone
that
we
would
then
configure
the
ftp
server
to
serve
saying
that
there
are
no
files
here
anymore.
A
Go
look
for
them
in
these
following
places.
That's
why
takedown
is
in
quote
we'll
still
be
running
ftp
somewhere,
but
it
will
only
be
serving
this
one
file
from
conversations
with
roman
this
week.
It's
now
down
to
just
adding
a
pointer
to
the
rfc
to
that
file,
and
we
should
be
able
to
hand
it
off
to
glenn.
A
One
thing
that
came
up
recently
discussing
zulub
that
I
want
input
from
the
people
on
this
call
from
when
we
set
up
the
zulip
trial.
We
had
some
people
ask
that
we
feed
some
email
lists
into
it
and
we
have,
in
our
zoola
service
plan
that
we
would
configure
groups
as
they
were,
set
up
in
zulu
to
also
include
having
their
email
list
fed
into.
It.
A
We
send
a
message
to
community
saying:
hey:
we
tried
this
thing,
we're
not
seeing
a
great
deal
of
discussion
of
it,
a
great
deal
of
uptake
of
it,
and
it's
got
these
problems.
We're
planning
on
removing
it
either
removing
those
streams
completely
or
archiving
them,
as
the
tool
will
allow
us
give
that
a
couple
of
weeks
and
then
execute
on
it.
Does
anybody
have
suggestions
for
doing
anything
other
than
that.
A
A
C
C
A
A
A
We
don't
need
them
anymore.
I
think
that
the
replacements
that
we've
built
at
author
tools
at
iddiff
and
the
author
tools
serve
of
adding
its
service
fine
as
a
replacement.
We
got
some
a
comment
on
the
list
from
paul
quiz
about
today.
That
would
be
nice.
If
id
nets
would
let
you
browse
a
file
and
run
id
nets
on
it,
which
is
not
present,
but
I
think
because
sorry,
I
don't
think
that
would
be
difficult
to
add.
A
So
I'm
also
planning
on
sending
a
signal
to
the
community
that
we're
just
going
to
start
redirecting
these
things
to
author
tools
in
a
couple
of
weeks,
see
if
it
shakes
out
any
other
things
that
people
do
with
those
services
that
author
tools
isn't
doing
for
them
already
and
they
just
make
that
switch.
Anybody
want
to
see
a
different,
a
change
to
that
plan.
C
A
A
Yeah,
I
don't
want
to
really
confuse
the
issue
of
changing
the
services
with
the
fact
that
the
services
had
appeared
at
www
and
if
we're
going
to,
I
think
we're
just
going
to
be
taking
www
6
down.
I
don't
think
there's
any
need
to
announce
that
any
right
so,
but
we
can't
completely-
I
mean
we.
We
can
redirect
the.
A
D
Yeah,
I
think
we're
getting
slightly
off
topics
now,
though,
so
for
the
for
the
author
tool,
stuff
I'll
prefer
if
we
can
redirect
soon,
because
the
id
cutoff
for
115
is,
I
think,
october
24,
or
something
like
that
so
well
before.
That
would
be
good
so
that,
if
there's
any
issues
that
that
people
have
enough
time
to
get
their
stuff
debugged
and
submitted.
A
A
A
A
D
A
D
A
No,
that's
not
true.
We
did
see
a
couple
of
fixes,
but
they
were
new
redirects
that
needed
to
be
added
this
last
week.
So
glenn
do
you
have
any
problems,
switching
the
redirects
that
we
already
have
over
to
be
permanent
redirects
and
then,
as
we
discover
any
new
ones
to
add,
we
just
add
them
as
temporary
redirects
for
a
few
weeks
and
then
switch
them
to
permanent.
A
A
The
small
issue
that
led
to
the
discussion
is
that
at
the
moment,
the
data
tracker
has
a
bug
in
its
production
of
bib
xml,
in
that
it
provides
initials,
it
adds
it
provides
the
initials
and
the
last
name.
It's
part
of
the
bib
xml.
If
you
ask
for
a
draft
at
a
particular
version,
if
you
ask
for
the
one
with
no
version,
it
does
not
provide
these
things.
It
is
a
silly
bug.
It
will
be
fixed
it's
in
the
queue
to
to
provide
the
last
name
and
initials,
but
the
what
had
been
this.
A
We
have
repeatedly
noted
that
there
are
many
cultures
in
the
world
now,
where
the
notion
of
last
name
as
we
are
forcing
latinized
last
names
on
names,
don't
make
sense.
People
have
to
make
something
up,
the
the
the
box
doesn't
fit
nicely
and
collation
is
impossible
unless
we
insist
on
the
rendering
of
their
of
their
last
name
in
a
latinized
script.
C
D
D
D
A
A
The
meeting
materials
as
artifacts
to
match
what
we're
planning
to
do
going
forward
with
zula,
but
our
initial
effort
is,
is
captured
in
here
already
we're
working
with
mutico
to
capture
whatever
transpires
through
the
chat
client
in
medico.
Whatever
is
happening
in
zulu
as
an
artifact
that
gets
captured
in
the
data
tracker
for
that
meeting
so
and
they've
got
the
data
for
114.
So
we
will
have
that
for
114
and
going
forward.
A
B
A
A
C
D
A
A
So
paul
waters,
wes
hartaker,
are
working
together
with
me
and
glenn
to
build
out
a
plan
for
approaching
how
we
are
are
assigning
our
dns
entries
differently
than
we
currently
are
driven
by
a
need
to
change
the
algorithm,
but
in
the
process
of
looking
at
what
we're
doing,
there's
also
a
very
strong
bit
of
feedback
to
change
the
the
mechanics
that
we're
using
to
increase.
If
nothing
else,
the
the
reduce
the
ttls
increases,
the
frequency
of
signing
so.
A
D
A
A
All
right,
so
the
last
thing
that
I
want
to
point
out
then
hey,
I
want
to
ask-
are
people
okay
with
doing
this
in
the
future,
because
I
would
be
happy
to
have
this
call
in
in
half
an
hour
when
it's
reasonable
for
it
to
end
in
half
an
hour.
If
the
tape
as
red
part
is
fine,
one
thing:
that's
kind
of
buried
at
the
bottom
that
we
might
want
to
change
is
a
little
bit
of
a
forced
discussion
on
forecasting
of
what's
coming
next.
A
A
So
from
an
expectations
setting
point
of
view,
those
of
you
that
are
are
waiting
for
things
that
we
have
lumped
in
with
that
transition
and
are
are
helping
manage
communications
to
other
bodies
about
it.
We
need
to
start
letting
folks
know
that
this
is
really
going
to
be
something
that's
going
to
be
creeping
well
into
next
year.
I
think
at
this
point.
E
Robert,
can
you
hear
me?
Yes,
okay,
I
have
a
question
about
the
part
about,
under
upcoming
for
the
data
tracker
requiring
draft
submissions
to
be
fully
expanded
versus
containing
x
includes-
and
I
understand
you
already
spoke
with
iasg
and
sandy
about
it
from
my
understanding.
Is
this
fully
expanding?
The
xi
includes
different
from
running
the
prep
tool
or
the
same
as
running
the
prep
tool.
A
A
If
it's
a
reasonable
thing
to
do,
to
help
people
that
might
be
wanting
to
pick
up
and
work
on
a
draft
later.
That
may
not
have
been
the
original
authors
so
that
they
have
the
original
unexpanded
source
material,
as
opposed
to
trying
to
build
in
a
path
where
there
was
something
like
unprep
to
take
the
fully
expanded
thing
back
into
something
that
had
pronouns
for
references.
D
Completely,
I
think
it
was
a
good
summary.
I
I
don't
feel
very
strongly
that
we
need
to
do
this
if
it's
sort
of
creating
issues
and
it's
also
sort
of
maybe
confusing
to
people,
but
if
they
have
to
upload
two
different
xmls,
I
kind
of
given
the
trajectory
for
markdown
for
editing.
I
kind
of
expect
that
we
would
much
rather
need
a
expanded,
xml
back
to
markdown
thing
for
this
document,
so
that
you
can
do
the
biz
business
markdown
and
not
an
xml.
E
Okay,
I
see
the
operational
implication
for
the
rpc,
because
we
want
that
one
without
the
expansions
so
either.
If
there's
not
two
xml
files
held
in
the
tracker,
then
we'll
be
requesting
the
unexpanded
xml
file
from
the
authors.
If
their
id
is
approved
or
requesting
that
there's
a
special
version
of
prep,
that
only
does
something
with
x
includes,
but
how
would
it
know
what
to
go
back
to
right
like
unless
the
url
is
in
a
comment
or
an
attribute?
But
that's
not
you
know
right.
B
Oh
sorry,
to
add
another
one.
You
were
calling
for
comments
whether
we
prefer
this
formula
right
when
we
read
and
we
ask
questions
on
unknown
stuff.
I
personally
prefer
to
spend
15
minutes
more
and
we
go
point
by
point
already,
because
typically
we
had
a
little
bit
more
information
than
the
dry
text,
but
if
it's
only
me,
I'm
all
set
to
do
what
we
did
today.
D
I
think
a
mixture
might
be
good
in
the
sense
that
you
gave
us
like
basically
the
entire
fyi
section
and
said:
does
anybody
have
any
questions?
I
think
my
views
will
just
basically
go
item
by
item,
but
not
you
summarizing
each
item.
Just
basically
ask
for
questions
about
item
blah
and
then
move
on
to
the
next
one.
So
there's
a
bit
more
structure.
A
Okay,
we'll
try
that
next
time,
the
one
thing
that
I
would
like
to
try
to
make
sure
that
is
getting
done.
I
haven't
ever
seen.
I've
asked
every
time
I've
sent
this
agenda
out
for
people
to
add
anything,
that's
missing
and
I'm
very
rarely
seen
anything
at
it,
and
I
really
worry
that
I've
got
a
blind
spot
and
I
would
really
appreciate
everybody
on
the
call
considering
whether
or
not
we've
got
a
blind
spot
and
feel.