IETF
softwire
softwire@jabber.ietf.org
Thursday, 2 August 2012< ^ >
TJ has set the subject to: Softwire
Room Configuration

GMT+0
[07:01:03] yao.vct joins the room
[07:03:57] yao.vct leaves the room
[07:05:34] Victor Yang joins the room
[07:05:42] Victor Yang leaves the room
[14:16:42] leaf.y.yeh joins the room
[14:16:54] leaf.y.yeh leaves the room
[15:41:46] fdupont joins the room
[15:48:44] ylee joins the room
[15:59:11] Jürgen Schönwälder joins the room
[16:00:30] Brian Haberman joins the room
[16:02:04] leaf.y.yeh joins the room
[16:03:17] arifumi joins the room
[16:04:59] tomtaylor joins the room
[16:05:32] <tomtaylor> Agenda bullet 3
[16:05:45] <tomtaylor> draft status
[16:07:18] <tomtaylor> draft status cont'd
[16:07:37] <tomtaylor> ... and cont'd
[16:08:43] cz joins the room
[16:08:47] <tomtaylor> Public 4over6 WGLC
[16:09:02] <tomtaylor> Peng Wu
[16:09:21] <tomtaylor> Feedback from the WGLC
[16:10:15] Suz joins the room
[16:10:40] <tomtaylor> next chart, same title
[16:11:16] Brian Haberman leaves the room
[16:11:30] <tomtaylor> Third chart, same title
[16:11:43] <tomtaylor> Updates in -02
[16:11:56] <tomtaylor> Implementation
[16:12:21] <tomtaylor> Deployment
[16:12:55] <tomtaylor> Final slide
[16:13:06] sarikaya2012 joins the room
[16:13:41] <tomtaylor> Suresh speaking
[16:13:48] <tomtaylor> Alain
[16:16:18] <tomtaylor> Discussion of relationship lightweight ...
[16:16:18] <tomtaylor> Test
[16:19:20] <tomtaylor> test
[16:19:21] <tomtaylor> Sorry, I'm gettiung no feedback.
[16:20:06] <tomtaylor> Next presentation, anywaymingwei
[16:20:06] tomtaylor leaves the room
[16:20:30] Suz leaves the room
[16:20:30] Jürgen Schönwälder leaves the room
[16:21:02] wmtownsley joins the room
[16:21:13] <wmtownsley> ping
[16:21:21] <wmtownsley> seems to work?
[16:21:40] pselkirk joins the room
[16:21:47] satoru.matsushima joins the room
[16:21:58] <sarikaya2012> Ming Wei finished mesh multicast draft presentation
[16:22:00] tomek joins the room
[16:22:23] <sarikaya2012> Now Woj presenting common spec
[16:22:45] <sarikaya2012> Intro slide
[16:23:52] <sarikaya2012> Architecture slide
[16:25:17] <sarikaya2012> Chair asked to go on
[16:25:39] <sarikaya2012> so what are main usability differences slide
[16:27:18] geir joins the room
[16:28:16] <ylee> I would like to say MAP-T and MAP-E are two solutions
[16:28:46] <ylee> Putting in one column is mis-leading
[16:30:25] <sarikaya2012> @Yiu, chair said it will be answered hopefully today
[16:30:34] <ylee> thanks
[16:30:37] <sarikaya2012> Gang on mic
[16:31:19] <sarikaya2012> Xiaohong at mic
[16:31:42] <sarikaya2012> left side features are desirable?
[16:32:00] <sarikaya2012> should we have them for each solution?
[16:33:07] <sarikaya2012> chair: whatever in the analysis draft is needed
[16:33:53] <sarikaya2012> dependency on CPE IPv6 addressing slide
[16:34:26] Ole Troan joins the room
[16:34:59] <sarikaya2012> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/84/slides/slides-84-softwire-13.pdf
[16:35:13] <sarikaya2012> proposal for converging specs slide
[16:36:34] <sarikaya2012> Alain on mic
[16:38:54] <sarikaya2012> 3 people on mic
[16:41:31] <sarikaya2012> Mingwei on mic
[16:41:57] <sarikaya2012> 4 people on mic
[16:43:54] <sarikaya2012> chair: we dont want different DHCP options for port range for each of MAP, 4rd, etc.
[16:45:25] <sarikaya2012> Alain on mic
[16:47:30] pselkirk leaves the room: Replaced by new connection
[16:47:31] pselkirk joins the room
[16:47:48] <sarikaya2012> Francis on mic
[16:48:21] <sarikaya2012> again 4 people on mic
[16:49:35] Tetsuya Murakami joins the room
[16:50:14] <sarikaya2012> Gang on mic
[16:50:37] <sarikaya2012> 6 people on mic
[16:50:51] tomt5454 joins the room
[16:51:19] <sarikaya2012> Alain on mic
[16:51:30] <tomt5454> Back at last. I can take back the duties if you want, Behcet
[16:51:47] <sarikaya2012> @tom, sure
[16:52:16] <tomt5454> Simon Perrault
[16:54:11] <tomt5454> Ralph Droms AD
[16:57:32] <tomt5454> Chart: summary
[16:58:34] <tomt5454> 4rd Remi presenting
[16:59:36] <tomt5454> Main objectives
[17:00:30] leaf.y.yeh leaves the room
[17:01:53] <tomt5454> Key mechanism 1
[17:06:40] <tomt5454> Chart 4: Key mechanism 2
[17:08:05] hide.zebra joins the room
[17:08:22] <tomt5454> 4rd chart 4
[17:10:24] <tomt5454> Wojciech Dec at the mic
[17:14:04] <tomt5454> Chartb 5 Conclusion
[17:14:53] <ylee> I guess Remi's point is 4rd is CNP. If the implementation doesn't care, it is fine but this is not his point.
[17:15:26] <tomt5454> Chart 7 Map-t vs 4rd
[17:15:44] <tomt5454> Yiu, should I relay that?
[17:16:36] <ylee> I think Gang's comment is good enough. No need to relay. Thx!
[17:17:12] <ylee> Why NAT64 becomes a requirement for the solution?
[17:18:36] <tomt5454> Chart 8 MAP-E vs 4rd
[17:20:49] <tomt5454> Mark Handley approaching the mic
[17:23:38] <tomt5454> Sheng Jiang
[17:24:11] <wmtownsley> s/Handley/Townsley :-)
[17:24:25] <tomt5454> >Oops sorry
[17:24:48] <tomt5454> Maoke
[17:25:20] <tomt5454> Woj
[17:25:40] <ylee> I see one major benefit is 4rd doesn't have the IP-in-IP encapsulation overhead. this is particular important for cable access network which we can increase the MTU size
[17:26:01] <ylee> I mean "we can't increase the MTU size"
[17:26:52] <tomt5454> Sheng
[17:27:06] cz leaves the room
[17:27:21] <wmtownsley> ylee: But, the IPv6 header is bigger than the IPv4 header, so the MTU of the overall packet still changes when you replace IPv4 with IPv6.
[17:27:46] <tomt5454> 4rd implementation report
[17:27:49] <tomt5454> ming wei
[17:27:57] <wmtownsley> Once you change the MTU, +/- 20 bytes doesn't really matter than much I don't think.
[17:28:09] Will joins the room
[17:28:10] <tomt5454> Chart: 4rd logical functions (CPE)
[17:28:39] <ylee> I don't disagree but the 20-byte bigger is better than 40-byte bigger
[17:28:39] <tomt5454> (BR)
[17:28:53] <tomt5454> Implementation in Linux
[17:29:53] <tomt5454> Preliminary conclusions
[17:31:54] <Ole Troan> @ylee 4rd overloads the fragment header to convey "encapsulation" information. MAP-E is +40, while 4rd is + 28
[17:31:56] <wmtownsley> ylee: I think there is a BIG difference between no MTU change at all, and even 1 byte of change. If IPv6 and IPv4 had the same size header (like Steve Deering originally proposed) then it would be a big plus to try and swap the headers rather than encap in terms of MTU control.
[17:32:07] <tomt5454> Woj
[17:32:18] <wmtownsley> But, that's not the case.
[17:32:49] <wmtownsley> So, any savings lands into the "header compression" bucket… if you are worried about packet size, do ROHC :-)
[17:32:53] <tomt5454> Remi
[17:33:21] <tomt5454> Woj
[17:33:46] <tomt5454> Sheng joining them at the mic
[17:34:46] <ylee> the updated 4rd design won't necessarily have a fragment header for every packet. But I do agree that changing 1 byte is still a change.
[17:35:09] Jürgen Schönwälder joins the room
[17:35:18] Jürgen Schönwälder leaves the room
[17:37:20] <tomt5454> Back to "preliminary Conclusions"
[17:37:36] <wmtownsley> glad we agree… The difference between 0 and +1 is huge, the difference between +1, +12, or +20 is minor by comparison…. If you look back to the PPP-based header compression stuff that we did for dialup, there were some gains back then, but at today's broadband speeds it's really quite negligible.
[17:37:47] <tomt5454> Remi
[17:38:19] <tomt5454> Sorry, speaker was Bing Liu
[17:38:30] <tomt5454> Presenter, I mean
[17:38:46] <tomt5454> Woj
[17:39:24] <tomt5454> Mark Townsley, MAP Simulation Tool
[17:40:56] <tomt5454> Screen shot, then shot with "Google play" at top
[17:41:07] <tomt5454> Shot from You Tube
[17:41:28] <tomt5454> Demo
[17:42:45] <fdupont> (pour Arthur) frimeur !
[17:43:12] <tomt5454> Link filling half the screen:)
[17:43:35] Ole Troan leaves the room
[17:43:42] Ole Troan joins the room
[17:43:52] wmtownsley leaves the room
[17:45:25] wmtownsley joins the room
[17:48:04] <tomt5454> MAP Testing Results
[17:48:18] <tomt5454> Testing Topology
[17:48:32] <tomt5454> Address format
[17:49:09] <tomt5454> Chart: MAP-T
[17:49:39] cz joins the room
[17:49:40] <tomt5454> Chart: MAP-E
[17:50:23] <tomt5454> Mixed
[17:51:30] <tomt5454> Backward compatibility
[17:51:59] <tomt5454> Ditto: NAT64
[17:52:18] <tomt5454> Conclusions
[17:53:15] <tomt5454> References
[17:53:39] <tomt5454> Remi at mic
[17:54:59] <tomt5454> Mark Townsley
[17:56:04] <tomt5454> Remi again
[17:56:22] <tomt5454> Sheng
[17:56:45] <tomt5454> Mark
[17:58:00] <tomt5454> Done
[17:58:12] <tomt5454> MAP Deployment
[17:58:26] <tomt5454> M. Chen
[17:58:38] hide.zebra leaves the room
[17:58:39] <tomt5454> Chart: Purpose
[17:59:58] <tomt5454> Chart: Where
[18:00:38] <tomt5454> Chart: How Deploy
[18:01:27] <tomt5454> Address Planning
[18:01:33] Will leaves the room
[18:02:53] <tomt5454> Further Remarks
[18:03:16] <tomt5454> Moving Forward
[18:06:13] <tomt5454> General discussion
[18:06:21] <tomt5454> Cameron Byrne
[18:07:55] <ylee> I agree with Cameron Byrne
[18:13:48] <tomt5454> Woj: Interop report
[18:14:01] <tomt5454> Chart: Agenda
[18:14:19] <tomt5454> Chart: Participants
[18:14:40] <tomt5454> Chart Simplified setup
[18:14:56] <tomt5454> Chart MAP-T Non-sharing result
[18:15:18] <tomt5454> MAP-T Sharing
[18:15:37] <tomt5454> MAP Setup NAT64 or AFTR
[18:15:41] cz leaves the room
[18:15:47] <tomt5454> Summary
[18:17:23] <tomt5454> hui
[18:18:27] <tomt5454> xiaohong deng
[18:19:27] <tomt5454> Sheng
[18:20:10] cz joins the room
[18:20:15] sarikaya2012 leaves the room
[18:22:46] <tomt5454> Remi
[18:23:32] <tomt5454> Maoke
[18:24:11] <tomt5454> Woj
[18:25:05] <tomt5454> gang
[18:25:39] <tomt5454> Tina Tsou
[18:26:36] <tomt5454> Mark
[18:26:39] geir leaves the room
[18:28:38] cz leaves the room
[18:30:25] cz joins the room
[18:34:44] cz leaves the room
[18:34:50] cz joins the room
[18:35:14] <ylee> the audio was cut. Is it just me?
[18:36:35] <tomt5454> I don't know
[18:37:15] <tomt5454> Suresh on AD's instructions has called a champion of each to front
[18:37:20] <tomt5454> flipping a coin
[18:38:19] <ylee> thanks Tom. I think the voice broadcast was stopped because the meeting was scheduled to end @11:30
[18:38:25] <tomt5454> Call is MAP = one solution or two (heads or tails)
[18:38:58] <tomt5454> Umpteen people recording event on their cameras
[18:39:05] <tomt5454> Two solutions
[18:40:16] <tomt5454> Now: which will be THE solution: MAP-E, MAP-T, or
[18:40:30] <tomt5454> Lots of hands for MAP-T
[18:40:39] <tomt5454> Far fewer for MAP-T
[18:40:41] cz leaves the room
[18:41:13] <tomt5454> 4rd in between, I think
[18:41:27] <tomt5454> Conferring with AD
[18:41:56] <tomt5454> Decision is MAP-E, to be confirmed on the list
[18:42:14] <tomt5454> >Now: what to do with the other solutions?
[18:43:11] <tomt5454> Asking how many wants others to go out as experimental at a later date
[18:43:18] <tomt5454> Fair number of hands
[18:43:41] <tomt5454> How many want the work just to go away -- ju7st one or two
[18:43:47] fdupont leaves the room: Computer went to sleep
[18:44:07] Ole Troan leaves the room
[18:44:11] tomek leaves the room
[18:44:15] <tomt5454> Done
[18:44:18] pselkirk leaves the room
[18:44:19] Tetsuya Murakami leaves the room
[18:44:21] wmtownsley leaves the room
[18:44:40] satoru.matsushima leaves the room
[18:45:45] <tomt5454> Bye
[18:45:49] arifumi leaves the room
[18:45:56] tomt5454 leaves the room
[19:01:05] tomek joins the room
[19:06:07] ylee leaves the room
[19:13:11] tomek leaves the room
[20:03:55] Ole Troan joins the room
[20:17:00] Tetsuya Murakami joins the room
[20:17:13] Tetsuya Murakami leaves the room
[20:36:09] Ole Troan leaves the room
[20:39:32] cz joins the room
[20:39:59] cz leaves the room
[21:08:48] tomek joins the room
[21:36:21] wmtownsley joins the room
[22:07:40] geir joins the room
[22:14:33] fdupont joins the room
[22:14:33] fdupont leaves the room
[22:18:22] tomek leaves the room
[22:18:43] tomek joins the room
[22:18:47] wmtownsley leaves the room
[22:18:58] wmtownsley joins the room
[22:31:13] tomek leaves the room
[22:38:33] tomek joins the room
[22:39:51] geir leaves the room
[22:47:20] tomek leaves the room: Replaced by new connection
[22:47:21] tomek joins the room
[23:01:47] tomek leaves the room
[23:11:28] arifumi joins the room
[23:27:02] tomek joins the room
[23:32:45] tomek leaves the room
[23:35:23] arifumi leaves the room
[23:38:42] tomek joins the room
[23:41:07] tomek leaves the room
[23:42:39] arifumi joins the room
[23:43:35] tomek joins the room
[23:43:36] tomek leaves the room
[23:43:45] tomek joins the room
[23:43:46] tomek leaves the room
[23:45:31] tomek joins the room
[23:45:31] tomek leaves the room
[23:46:46] tomek joins the room
[23:46:52] tomek leaves the room
[23:47:33] tomek joins the room
[23:51:06] tomek leaves the room
[23:54:15] tomek joins the room
Powered by ejabberd Powered by Erlang Valid XHTML 1.0 Transitional Valid CSS!