Hello,

Materials of the NMRG interim meeting at ETS Montreal, July 2018 are here: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/interim-2018-nmrg-03/session/nmrg

If you think NMRG should work on a survey on IBN or other proposals, please 
feel free to send e-mail messages / make your case to the NMRG mailing list 
([email protected]) and/or the NMRG chair (me😉).
FYI: NMRG will hold a virtual meeting very soon (week 4-8 March) where 
IBN/other topics of interest could be discussed before IETF 104.

Thanks, Laurent.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anima <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Toerless Eckert
> Sent: Friday, February 22, 2019 11:57
> To: Michael Richardson <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Anima] Intent: -> NMRG -> ANIMA -> NMRG -> (ANIMA?)!) Re:
> proposed anima charter (was; Re: New work item proposal / agenda request)
> 
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 02:30:43PM -0500, Michael Richardson wrote:
> >     > Intent was given to us (ANIMA) from NMRG as part of the initial
> chater
> >     > scope. We did include it into the reference model, but we failed
> to find
> >     > enough actionable agreement on what Intent is and what to do about
> it.
> >
> > I thought that we make it out of scope so that SUPA would do the work,
> but
> > SUPA failed. (I'm reminded by the "POLICY" WG of 20 years ago...)
> 
> Hah. I skipped the SUPA episode because i don't remember if we really
> ever made specific decisions in that case as opposed to just observing
> it.
> 
> >     > We therefore for now would like to punt the next steps of work on
> Intent
> >     > back to NMRG and hope we can make enough progress there to later
> bring
> >     > it back into ANIMA.
> >
> > Fair enough.  I don't know if the charter should refer readers to NMRG.
> 
> Seems the guidance we got in IETF103 was to start short and let
> qualified charter reviewers ask for what they feeel missing. Where
> qualified charter reviewers would i think be IESG.
> 
> > I also wonder if there are any proprietary efforts to define Intent that
> > could be referenced?
> 
> Sure, but for now that collection of information should be done in NMRG.
> 
> >     > I had given a more detailed presentation to this effect at the
> friday
> >     > NMRG workshop at IETF101 in Montreal, but somehow i can not find
> any
> >     > slides from that friday meeting. Maybe Laurent can comment were
> that
> >     > NMRG workshop notes are. There where more really good
> presentations.
> >
> > Maybe in the proceedings?  I guess there is a youtube video too.
> 
> No, the friday NMRG workshop was hosted at the university, so no
> standard IETF video gear was there. Let me ping Laurent directly.
> 
> Cheers
>     Toerless
> 
> > ]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh
> networks [
> > ]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        |    IoT
> architect   [
> > ]     [email protected]  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on
> rails    [
> >
> >
> > --
> > Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Sandelman Software Works
> >  -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Anima mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
_______________________________________________
Anima mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima

Reply via email to