Ack!
On 11/16/17, 6:25 PM, "Satoru Matsushima"
wrote:
>Hi, thank you Danny and for the minute.
>
>Please correct the minute for:
>
>> Dave (Ericsson): was that presented in spring
>
>-> Satoru: Not yet.
>
>
>FYI I had a chat with spring chairs to share what's going
Hi, thank you Danny and for the minute.
Please correct the minute for:
> Dave (Ericsson): was that presented in spring
-> Satoru: Not yet.
FYI I had a chat with spring chairs to share what's going on with SRv6.
Maybe I’d request sprint chairs a slot to present SRv6 Mobile UPlane in next
IETF
... Uploaded Rev 2 with proposed corrections from Charlie; corrections
highlighted in red.
From: dmm > on behalf of Sri
Gundavelli >
Date: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 at 2:05 PM
To:
Hello folks,
Here are some comments that I had sent to the co-authors. It was
suggested that these discussions should really be carried out in a
larger context. Any comments will be appreciated. I am in the process
of receiving the editorial pen for the document and part of my purpose
Another proposal:
To not disrupt descriptors and actions by removing attributes that belong
together (ID-Type-Value), what about keeping the current format and apply a new
attribute 'x-value-settings' to Descriptor-Reference and Action-Reference
respectively?
This should follow define once-
Proposal from Satoru: Move Action-Value to
[Rule-Definition]->[Action-Reference]. Same for Descriptor-Value, which may go
to [Rule-Definition]->[Action-Definition].
Reason: To make sure "Define once, use many" throughout the models.
What to change:
Current Policy substructure looks as
Please find below a few notes from an FPC side discussion today.
We will set up the issue tracker tool to track and resolve raised items.
Some items for discussion are in the notes below and will be taken to the
list.
marco
-- FPC discussion 2017-11-16
--
Danny: Current Policy structure is ok