Minutes IETF111: cdni
minutes-111-cdni-02

Meeting Minutes Content Delivery Networks Interconnection (cdni) WG
Title Minutes IETF111: cdni
State Active
Other versions plain text
Last updated 2021-07-27

Meeting Minutes
minutes-111-cdni

CDNI WG Minutes
IETF-111 Online
Chairs: Kevin Ma and Sanjay Mishra
AD: Francesca Palombini

Agenda and Slides: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/111/session/cdni
Recording: http://www.meetecho.com/ietf111/recordings#CDNI

Chair slides (Kevin J. Ma)
--------------------------
Kevin: RFC8804 published since last meeting at IETF-103

CDNI URI Signing (Phil Sorber)
------------------------------
Phil: If anyone has input or suggestions on IESG comments, please email or
submit a PR

Chris Lemmons (chat): Agree with Kevin's proposal wrt staying off marks lawn

Chris: Will propose some text and submit PRs

Kevin: Can we address the remaining comments by IETF-112

Phil: Should be able to finish by IETF-112

HTTPS Delegation (Frederic Fieau)
---------------------------------
Frederic: More prototyping to be done.

Frederic: Are we ready for WGLC?

Kevin: Is the draft ready, or are we waiting on dependencies beyond ACME STAR.

Kevin: I can do a preliminary review if we are really ready.

Frederic: ACME STAR RFC is published, but others are still waiting.

Sanjay: We should consider splitting out just the ACME STAR portion.

Guillaume Bichot: Any reason only PathMatch and not also HostMatch support.

Frederic: Open to suggestions.

Kevin: We still have time to make changes, we should take the discussion to the
list.

CDNI Triggers (Nir Sopher)
--------------------------
Nir: New functions: Error propagation, Content Selection, and message format.

Kevin: We're running behind, please comment on threads on the list.

Nir: Request WG adoption of rfc8007bis draft.

Kevin: We already adopted draft-ietf-cdni-triggers-extensions after IETF-103,
and draft-sopher-cdni-ci-triggers-rfc8007bis-01 is really a rev of
draft-ietf-cdni-triggers-extensions after we decided that it makes more sense
to replace RFC8007, so it makes sense to adopt? no objections.

Francesca: Does this require rechartering (is this a new protocol)?

Kevin: We had decided that this was functionality that really should have been
in RFC8007, so it is really the same protocol, just fixing things we missed.

Kevin: We will take it to the list.

CDNI Metadata (Glenn Goldstein)
-------------------------------
Glenn: The draft is light on details; high level descriptions taken from much
larger SVA spec.

Kevin: It was always the intent of CDNI to let vendors add their own,
operationally useful, metadata.

Kevin: Please add more details to the draft and everyone please comment on the
list.

Capacity Advertisement: (Andrew Ryan)
-------------------------------------
Andrew: Like Glenn's draft, this draft is light on details; taken from a much
larger SVA spec.

Kevin: Is it just metadata and FCI objects, or is there protocol work that
might conflict with ALTO?

Andrew: SVA is developing their own transport protocol, but the draft only
covers metadata and FCI.

Kevin: Please add more details to the draft and everyone please comment on the
list

CDNI Footprints (Nir Sopher)
----------------------------
Nir: New ISO3166-2Code and footprint union footprint types

Nir: Request WG adoption of footprint draft

Kevin: ISO3166-2Code makes sense, and footprint union is something we missed
originally; both are straight forward and make sense, so I see no reason not to
adopt?

no objections.

Kevin: We will take it to the list.

Session closed.