RG Last call for deployment guidelines?
RG adoption of MAP-Me? Need more eyes on it
Sunday meeting summary (Dirk Kutscher)- see Sunday notes
RG Drafts - Specs (Dave Oran), See meeting slides
WEN = Wireless Edge Network
Description of the projects - see slides
Q (???): Why are FGGAs better than GPU?
A: (Lixia) FPGA gives more flexibility for the variability of AR.
Q (???): Untethered VR enabled by 5G how can NDN benefit this effort?
A: (Lixia) Predictive caching needs “names”
Q: (Luca) Link to the NDN tested?
N9 interface design updates is where there was request to the IETF.
Q: (Ravi) They are trying to do traffic management not mobility management; more slicing problems
Q: (Dirk) Is the CT4 study to survey only or lead to
A: (Luca) There will be some recommendations
Comment: (Eve) Huge opportunity for the IRTF to influence the space.
Comment :(Luca) Agreed
Q: (DaveO) Tunneling for authorization/authentication to a centralized place - 3GPP is not looking at how this need to change outside tunneling
A: (Luca) User plane only - other planes are not included but the AA will start at new thread because it needs to be solved
Note: mobility architectures are all based on IPv6.
Q:(?) H-ICN is like a NAT?
Comment: (DaveO) You cannot have a NAT if you do not have IP addresses
Important to understand the opportunity
Q: (??) Have you looked at scalability when you try to do per flow (N^2 complexity_
A: (Luca) Per flow state
Q: (Dirk) Current work on hICN - opportunity for native ICN or ICN
No if IPv6 - but work by Ravi on abstraction PDU is a narrow opportunity - so yes but longer term
Comment/Q: (Ravi) You are creating a new type of packets? NM is a problem.
Comment: (DaveO) Dangerous to call these packets “different” they are IPv6 parleys - mobile operators try to differentiate traffic which is a mistake.
A: (Luca) DGP will be
Q: (??) will you be able to AA users without N^2 complexity
A: (DaveO): AA is not N^2 it’s N
Q: (Dirk) There is work on this in DMM is there anything ICNRG should do?
A: (Luca) The research
Q: (Eve) How do we advocate and get the proposals in shape ad ready to influence; since 3GPP moves fast?
A; (Luca) Research group can provide data/use cases
Comment: (Eve) Keep us appraised and tell us what you need.
Comment: (DaveO) Went fairly fast and got nice inputs. Need to get more eyes on it. Cheers to start an RG last call.
Q: (Thomas) References need to be updated.
A: (Milan) Will be done.
Q: (DaveO) Sensitive issues about Lawful Intercept; IETF does not want to get into these things - will supply guidance
NRS= Name Resolution Service
Comment: (Dirk) Chairs wonder what to do with the work. They have done a lot of work and have good results. Name resolution comes ofter in the group? What could be the good output for the work?
Q: (DaveO) Assessment of the group: is this publishable? Quality and maturity of the work to justify publication.
Comment: (Borje) Would be good to have this documented and it’s one good input to the discussion
Comment (Dirk) Proposal on how to proceed forward will be produced.
Comment (Dirk): More eyeballs needed. Continue the discussion on the mailing list.
Q: (Luca) We ned this kind of tools as they are missing; can it be adapted to hICN?
Chairs: Who had read the draft? Statement about adoption.
Comment: (Akbar) Good to adopt. Alignment with CT4 study. Would like more details?
A: (Ravi) Native ICN not IPv6. We are not mixing the 2 worlds.