Agenda. 2025-06-18 Virtual Interim meeting.

• Note Well https://www.ietf.org/about/note-well/

• Logistics for Meeting

  • Notes:
    https://notes.ietf.org/notes-ietf-interim-2025-asdf-05-asdf?edit
  • Meetecho:
    https://meetings.conf.meetecho.com/interim/?group=6af3cbd6-bd0c-42dc-b748-5464c0530e3b
  • github: https://github.com/ietf-wg-asdf/

• SDF extension for Non-Affordance Information

  • CB: needs to fit into SDF architecture,
  • CB: we need to make sure that we always have space for an
    ecosystem specific attribute/variant. So that the messages are
    mapped to something very specific in that ecosystem.
  • CB: a patch/delta makes a lot of sense for many usages, not just
    nonAffordance. There is a t2trg meeting on Thursday, which
    will deal with information models ___ at that meeting.
  • MCR: is patch critical to this proposal?
  • JH: it is not critical.
  • AK: the LCM model for SDF is interesting. Maybe side meeting in
    Madrid is good for this.

• Digital Twin documnts

  • conversation about adoption, and if we are ready to do that yet.

• WG Adoption of drafts

  • MCR asked about objections to adopting the document, and there
    was some feeling that they haven't been reviewed enough, but
    perhaps before Madrid.

• NIPC updates and discussion

  • https://github.com/ietf-wg-asdf/asdf-nipc/issues
  • discussion about hackathon plans and the open source version,
    and about demo of cisco implementation.
  • would like to get through the open issues, requested a plan on
    side-meeting vs main meeting scheduling

  • #102 - can broadcasts be used for affordances? No.

    • is a broadcast directed to a single device? Yes.. often. But
      heard by many. Seems to be BTLE only.
    • it will be closed.

  • #100 - Action API, should this be a POST method?

    • a Post with a Location: return with a handle, with a handle
      that can be GET for status.
    • did not do multivalue yet, needs to have a new issue for
      that. ACTION.
    • does open API specification let us provide more detail about
      the content-format?
    • can add the content-format quality in an example? ACTION NEW
      ISSUE.

  • #99 -

  • #98 - read-all.

    • we do not associate an SDF model to a specific device today,
      so how can we get everything?

    • supporting read-all requires that the model be known to the
      gateway so that it can enumerate all the attributes.

      • An application could enumerate all the attributes
        itself.

    • AK: maybe if the list of models was loaded to the gateway,
      then we could optionally connect to the devices as an
      optional API call.

      • this option has very serious implementation
        considerations!

    • read-all would be nice, but the link to the model would be
      useful for other things.

    • this goes against having a centralized deployment model,
      with applications getting a list of models, maybe this is a
      SCIM problem.
    • not closing yet.

  • #97 - request body over verbose

    • will just have a list of properties. Close.

  • #96 - path elements to reflect "collections"

    • closed.

  • #95 - openapi descriptions. closed.

  • #94 - rename property parameter to propertyName

    • closed.

  • #93 - less detail in responses.

    • success, 204 only.
    • removed parameters that was already in the request
    • allow JSON or octet-stream in reply.

  • #89 - id parameter location

    • /device/registration looks confusing if "id=registration",
      so this is now consistent where id is.
    • closed

  • #88 - action APIs with protocol mapping,

    • now under /manage, read/write deprecated.
    • closed.

• AOB

  • agreed to have another virtual interim July 2, 2025. Booked.
  • Bart would like all issues closed before Madrid.