►
From YouTube: IETF-ROLL-20230921-1300
Description
ROLL interim meeting session
2023/09/21 1300
https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/roll/meetings/
A
C
C
C
C
Thank
you
very
much.
Susan
and
Pascal
is
addressing
the
version.
33
address
the
first
part
of
the
issues
and
one
ticket
as
well
was
created
in
GitHub.
For
that
preview,
then
NSA
extension,
some
issues
addresses
I,
know,
there's
still
one
of
insurance
that
we
will
discuss
later
and
for
internet
priority.
They
are
working
progress.
We
are
addressing
open
issues,
I
think
that
it
will
be
a
new
version
next
Monday
for
more
picks.
There
was
a
new
version
and
recently
and
some
comments
from
Alvaro
that
Raul
is
addressing
and
about
the
rnfe.
C
We
can
discuss
about
these
topics
in
next
in
the
meetings
as
well
them
from
the
milestones
we
have
one
Milestone
stand,
that
is,
data
projection
come
from
the
other
ones.
We
need
a
a
new
date,
so
we
want
to
ask
your
opinion
about
these
new
dates
like,
for
example,
about
the
well
Source
root
multicast
for
ripple
to
the
ISD,
with
plan
like
November
24,
then
for
the
young
model
for
MPL.
C
Well,
we
don't
know
if
someone
wants
to
continue
this
work.
We
can
rise
together
in
the
cold
comments
to
the
mail
list
and
decide
in
November
if
we
draw,
but
we'll
continue
with
this
work
item,
then
fast
border
router
transportation
in
Ripple.
You
know
I
think
that
we
don't
drop
this
one.
This
is
like
a
FD,
so.
D
E
A
F
C
That
so,
okay,
okay,
thank
you
and
then
or
closed,
maybe
March
24,
because
if
we
need
to
take
some
items,
I
said
from
the
work
Ethans,
we
need
to
recharge
there.
So,
let's
see
and
for
the
proposal
of
augment
these
flags,
we
think
as
well.
December
24
is
someone
to
take
this
further
and
for
the
capabilities
we
think
June
24
the
mod
of
operations
between
February
next
year
24.
C
C
B
B
C
Okay,
great
thank
you
Michael
and
Conrad.
Yes,
so
the
next
steps
for
this
document
will
be.
We
would
like
to
have
two
internal
reviews
before
the
working
the
last
call
and
at
the
same
time
we
will
request
the
routine
and
security
directories,
reviews
that
now
it's
like
suggested
that
every
document
before
going
to
the
submission
to
the
isg
need
a
routine
and
Security
reviews.
So
that
is
a
very
good
point,
so
we
will
proceed
with
that
too.
A
B
A
B
B
C
Thank
you.
I
have
a
question
for
contract
current
in
the
draft
to
go
from
the
states
from
the
state
up
to
locally
down.
You
go
to
the
suspected
down
state,
and
in
that
you
mark
that
you
can
use
data
plane
and
control
plane
and
I
would
like
to
know
if
that
applies
well
to
the
other
transitions,
or
only
from.
F
C
C
E
F
F
Okay,
but
I
think
both
both
can
go
like
from
up
to
locally
down
or
suspected
from
suspected
down
to
locally
down.
They
can
be
either
via
control,
plane
or
data
plane,
and
the
same
is
true
for
4A
and
4B,
so
that
there
is
some
symmetry
like
2,
2A
and
2B
can
go
Based
on
data
play
and
control
plane
and
the
same
for
for
a
and
for
B.
F
C
F
C
A
C
A
E
A
E
F
A
A
E
A
F
A
G
A
E
G
65
sorry
67
19.,
but
since
we
are
talking
about
another
thing
about
the
alternative
parent,
we
didn't
copy
it
exactly
in
the
same
way
and
that
left
open
a
window
for
a
discussion,
in
which
case
it
it
deviates
from
how
it
works
for
the
preferred
parents,
so
I
think
we
resolved
it.
I
haven't
closed
the
issue,
but
basically
we
will.
We
had
some
one
part
that
was
mandatory
and
another
fund
which
was
recommended
and
they
would
Clash.
So
it's
basically
a
small
issue.
A
G
A
A
Ca
set
does
not
match
and
so
which
it
should
set.
The
cost
to
Max
buff
cost
in
I,
I
thought
I
understood.
Your
question
was
well
in
general,
when
we
say
should
we
should
explain
what
the
consequences
are
for
not
complying
with
the
should
and
and
so
as
an
example
for
everybody's
Enlightenment.
What
is
the
kind
of
situation
where
you
you
would
deviate
from
that
recommendation
and
not
set
the
cost
to
Max
bus
cost
and
I
thought?
That
was
the
question
and
first
to.
A
G
Yes,
so
for
me,
I
have
thought
about
it
and,
to
be
honest,
I
haven't
found
a
case
where
this,
where
you
wouldn't
do
it.
So
if
you
fail
the
CIA
requirements
effectively,
the
candidate
neighbor
shouldn't
be
chosen
right.
It's
it's
a
hard
requirement,
so
I
think
maybe
I'm
not
actually
sure.
Even
why,
in
the
initial
RFC
the
6719
they
did
this
as
a
recommendation.
As
far
as
I.
Remember,
there's
no
justification
for
this,
so
for
me,
I
think
we
can
keep
it
as
a
must.
Not
in
that
sense.
C
G
Leaving
that
open
for
implementation,
if
someone
else
is
aware
for
a
historical
reason
why
this
was
not
done
as
a
as
a
requirement
but
as
a
recommendation
I'm
happy
to
to
learn.
But
but
at
least
me
I,
don't
see
any
clear
reason
why
and
maybe
what
I
could
guess
is
that
for
the
Mr
Hof
you
don't
have
an
alternative
parent.
So
maybe
they
left
this
as
a
suggestion
in
the
case
where
you
don't
really
have
any
other
parents
and
you'd
like
to
still
prefer
a
parent
than
having
none.
G
D
D
H
D
Yeah
I
should
revisit
the
text
in
repo,
but
yes,
I
mean
at
some
point
what
size
is
correct,
you
you
need
a
parent
and
you
might
need
to
re-parent
to
somebody
who's
deeper
and
then
you've
got
the
loop
avoidance
thing
so
so,
but
but
I'm
not
sure.
If
that's
that
recommendation
in
the
original
text
was
that
over
so
I,
when,
if
somebody
can
drop
me
an
email
with
just
the
text
that
was
about
that.
D
That's
why
I'm
speaking
Dominique
I
was
the
orines
I
was
looking
at
at
your
summary
of
what
happened
to
the
Dow
projection.
We
need
new
guys
to
to
come
back
to
the
old
projection
before
the
end
of
this
call,
because
I
did
answer
the
the
mail
from
Sue
RS
meet
September
around
September
13.,
and
so
the
ball
is
really
in
our
camp,
not
in
mine.
A
Just
to
come
back
to
NSA
extension,
I
think
there
are
two
points
here,
so
just
for
everybody
to
be
in
the
same
patient,
and
that
one
point
is:
why
did
ever
Mr
Hoff
write
should
and
what
did
the
offers
have
in
mind
at
that
time
and
that
just
for
General
Enlightenment
and
the
second
thing
is
what
should
we
do
in
NSC
extension
and
I?
Think
we
agree
that
you
need
to
say
extension,
we
will
write,
must
be
set
to
Maxwell's
cost
and,
and
the
rest
is,
you
know,
for
General
consistency
and
history.
G
G
A
As
chairs,
we
have
asked
for
a
review
from
routing
directorate
and
security
directorate
and
well
this
well
that
was
summer
vacation
I
guess
we
haven't
gotten
any
answer.
We
ping
them
again,
I
think
a
few
weeks
ago.
No
answer
yet
so
we'll
keep
putting
pressure
I!
Think
unless
you
have
the
control,
can
you
go
to
next
slide?
Please
thank
you!
So
yeah,
let's
try
to
get
those
reviews
and
then
I'm
the
shepherd
on
this
document.
A
So
I
will
update
the
right
up
and
I
will
issue
another
working
group
class
call
from
just
so
that
everybody
is
clear
about
this.
The
the
document
was
returned
to
the
working
group,
and
so
we'll
do
another
working
group
plus
call
that
should
be
quick,
especially
based
on
the
discussions.
We
have
right
now
and
then
resubmit
any
comments.
Question
on
that
I'll.
E
A
E
C
H
A
H
C
Okay,
great,
thank
you
very
much
Raul.
So
for
next
steps.
That's
the
same
as
the
previous
document.
We
will
request
the
two
internals
review
within
the
group
working
group
and
then
at
the
same
time,
the
routing
Security
directorate
reviews
and
then
ISO
about
call
and
then
to
publish
the
write
up,
separate,
write
up
and
based
on
the
voltage.
Roblox
call
results.
We
submit
to
the
isg
some
comment
or
questions
about
Disney's
next
steps.
A
Sorry
yeah
a
late
comment
on
mopex
I
I,
read
it
again
quickly
before
the
meeting
and
I
I
noticed
this
sentence.
That
says
we
can
use
for
mopex
the
same
values
as
well
in
a
mob
field
originally,
and
this
is
to
be
taken
as
the
same
mode.
I'm
sorry
Raul,
you're
coming
in
quite
loud.
Can
you
mute?
Please
thank
you.
A
So
we
can
reuse
the
same
values
in
the
mopex
field
and
this
is
to
be
interpreted
that
the
network
is
operating
under
the
same
mode
with
in
the
sentences
with
an
augmented
semantics
or
augmented,
meaning
or
something.
Maybe
some
optional
features
are
mandatory
when
this
old
mode
is
operated
as
a
new
mode
in
the
mapex
field.
A
So
I
was
wondering
if
we
want
to
clarify
that,
and
especially
with
the
assignment
with
Iana,
can
we
assign
the
old
values
in
the
new
field
to
and
and
name
them
differently,
or
something
to
explain
that
it's
not
quite
the
same
mood
as
it
was
before
so
just
open
question
and
again
I
should
put
that
in
writing
on
the
mailing
list.
But
since
we're
having
a
little
bit
of
time
here,
any
comments
on
that.
H
About
that
in
the
draft,
if
not
I'll,
that's
that's.
That
is
something
that
definitely
has
to
be
clarified.
I
guess
the
question:
if
I
just
want
to
revisit
the
question,
the
question
is
the
old
MLP
values
if
they
appear
in
the
new
Fields
New
Mob
experience,
how
should
it
be
interpreted
and
whether
there
is
not
if
there
is
no
explicit
text
in
the
draft
I
thought
there
is
an
explicit
text
to
that.
A
Right
service
text
that
says
it's
the
same
value
as
before,
but
because
it's
an
it's
in
a
new
field.
Maybe
there
are
some
features
that
are
made
mandatory
that
were
optional
before,
and
it
even
has
a
link
to
the
capabilities
draft
which
we
may
be,
which
may
be
a
bit
annoying
if
we
want
to
publish
so
two
things
is
what
do
we
really
want
in
this
draft
and
second,
for
for
the
future?
A
H
A
H
The
reference
to
tripabilities
have
to
be
Revisited
for
sure,
I
think
it
might
be.
It
might
be
a
straight
reference
because
if
you
remember
there
was
a
single
Draft
before
for
both
the
action
items
and
objects
and
capabilities,
and
then
we
later
split
it
out
and
maybe
some
of
these
history
references
might
have
been
left
out
there.
If.
A
A
A
C
Thank
you
very
much
additional
comment
or
questions.
Okay,
so
for
enrollment
priority
we
have
these
open
issues
in
GitHub,
I,
don't
know
Michael.
If
these
issues
are
still
or
should
we
close
them
are
still
on
valid,
or
should
we
close
them?
If
you
want
to
take
a
look,
there
are
some
questions
that
somewhere
answer
on
some
note.
Yes,.
E
A
And
probably
half
of
it
a
bit
more
than
a
half
are
answered,
yeah,
that's
what
I
thought.
Incidentally,
I
asked
some
question
about.
By
the
way
this
option
doesn't
have
a
name
in
the
draft.
It
just
says
this
option
and
I.
Only
after
sending
the
mail
out
to
everybody,
I
discovered
this
was
actually
ticket
number
four,
so
nothing
new,
and
this
one
is
not
answered
yet,
as.
A
So
maybe
we
want
more
General
name
or
maybe
stick
with
priority,
and
and
we
still
have
the
deck
size
added
to
it.
Without
mentioning
I,
don't
know,
participants
open
and
also
I
I
brought
an
email
just
before
the
meeting
with
two
questions,
and
one
is
about
the
explicitly
explicit
reset
of
the
total
timer
when
I
look
at
the
ticket.
There
was
a
discussion
at
least
a
year
back
about.
A
A
A
F
F
F
C
A
We
have
an
exponent
of
page
two
exponents
on
4
bits
and
we
have
12
bits
mantiser
and
the
the
recent
versions
of
the
draft
explained
that
anyway,
the
dudac
size
information
is
very
approximate
because
it's
counting
Gau
prefixes
or
addresses
when
we
don't
quite
know
how
many
nodes
hide
behind
those
prefixes
and-
and
we
don't
know
what
sort
of
traffic
each
of
those
nodes
send
out
anyway,
and
so
they
do.
The
exercise.
Information
should
be
taken
with
a
grain
of
salt
and
so
I'm.
A
Thinking
about
that
I
ask
myself:
do
we
need
12
bits
of
resolution?
This
seems
kind
of
Overkill
and
and
then,
if
you
try
to
compress
that
field,
we'll
see
entropy
in
that
field,
then
you
know
things
like
shake
or
others
will
have
a
hard
time
compressing
that
field,
because
they
vary
all
the
time
it
seems
to
me,
four
bits
would
be
enough.
That
would
be
for
the
mantissa,
that
is
about
10
accuracy
and
given
the
explanations
that
I
just
give
previously,
that
seems
pretty
good
comments
on
that
and
we
would
save
a
full
bite
in.
B
B
C
C
A
F
G
G
C
E
D
D
D
C
D
The
only
one
we
tried
for
experimental
was
the
P2P
and,
and
all
that
did
is
that
the
P2P
was
never
implemented
or
tried
by
anybody.
So
the
intention
of
experimental
doesn't
really
work
without
space,
so
so
say
that
putting
into
experimental
would
just
kill
it,
because
nobody,
you
know
in
University,
Academy
Etc,
would
try
to
implement
it.
So
it's
not
a
good
idea,
I
mean
if
it
was
so
then
even
Ripple
would
have
been
experimental.
D
A
B
A
A
Yeah,
that's
right
and
yeah
I've
taken
the
protection
item
to
organize
that
over
the
summer
and
yeah
did
not
pursue
that.
This
meeting
is
kind
of
late,
but
with
this
meeting
and
the
the
role
session
at
itf118,
then
then
the
next
interim
would
probably
be
yeah,
mid-December
or
beginning
in
January.
That
would
be
probably,
and
then
we
can
have
a
two
or
three
space
above
two
months,
maybe
in
the
in
the
spring
it
could
be
so
our
Horizon
for
the
the
current
pieces
of
work.
G
A
A
C
C
E
A
C
A
Quite
dragged
into
many
other
projects
which
are
non-work
related,
and
so
my
intention
is
to
step
down
as
a
working
group
co-chair
within
the
next
six
months.
Maybe
so
sometime
between
Prague
and
Brisbane
or
at
Brisbane
I
would
not
be
there
physically,
but
at
least
around
that
time,
and
so
if
anybody
has
always
had
the
dream
of
becoming
co-chair
of
role,
this
is
probably
a
good
time
for
you.
A
But
yeah,
actually
those
who
are
present
are
those
mostly
involved.
More
was
deeply
involved
in
the
work
control.
Nowadays,
the
problem
is
most
relevant
to
become
co-chairs
overall,
so
yeah,
you
don't
have
to
oh
my
God
to
step
up
right
now,
but
think
about
it.
If
anybody
is
interested
otherwise
we'll
go
the
usual
route
for
finding
another
code.
Here.
G
A
A
To
be
honest,
it's
very
adjustable
adaptive
only
it
can
be
as
infinite
as
you
want
it
to
be.
If
you
want
to
do
everything
right
and
and
be
on
top
of
things
constantly,
it
can
be
a
significant
part
of
your
time
and,
to
be
honest,
this
summer
I've
kind
of
disappeared
for
two
months,
and
so
yes,
if
you
sample
my
amount
of
work
for
these
two
months,
it
was
close
to
zero.
But
you
can't
do
that
forever.
B
B
A
A
G
D
A
Between
being
you
know,
Shepherd,
chair,
Etc
and
being
an
offer,
so
it's
kind
of
a
role
play
that
in
a
working
group,
you'll
be
a
participant
and
in
the
other
working
group
should
be
the
chair
and
and
yeah.
You
know.
The
first
group
chair
will
be
a
participant
in
the
second
group.
You
can
see
Pascal
alternating
between
walls
in
the.
D
G
D
C
Thank
you
very
much
to
everyone.
Domini
will
greatly
miss
you.
You
are
doing
a
great
job
last
year
and
you
are
great
here
so
I
want
to
yeah
I'm
very
happy
to
work
with
any
of
you
and
thank
you
very
much
for
volunteer
for
this
role.
If,
when
you
take
your
decision,
we
can
have
a
meeting
to
explain
you,
we
probably
have
pvt
meetings
with
the
chairs.
We
speak
about
the
status
of
the
working
group,
but
we
will
send
as
well
maybe
to
you
some
links,
so
you
can
read
and
the
ITF.