[{"author": "Lou Berger", "text": "<p>is the audio level okay</p>", "time": "2023-03-30T04:01:16Z"}, {"author": "Vishnu Beeram", "text": "<p>Can someone remote ack if the audio is ok?</p>", "time": "2023-03-30T04:03:03Z"}, {"author": "Lorenzo Miniero", "text": "<p>Sounds ok here</p>", "time": "2023-03-30T04:03:25Z"}, {"author": "Andrew Stone", "text": "<p>remote sound is okay</p>", "time": "2023-03-30T04:03:34Z"}, {"author": "Vishnu Beeram", "text": "<p>thanks!</p>", "time": "2023-03-30T04:03:39Z"}, {"author": "Dhruv Dhody", "text": "<p>@adrian - we used \"string\" for ac-svc-name because of that</p>", "time": "2023-03-30T04:33:51Z"}, {"author": "Vishnu Beeram", "text": "<p>The AC modeling presentation from Med that Reza referred to is on our agenda in the second session..</p>", "time": "2023-03-30T04:37:10Z"}, {"author": "Mohamed Boucadair", "text": "<p><span class=\"user-mention\" data-user-id=\"114\">@Dhruv Dhody</span>,  using a string would work. BTW, this should be a leaf-list as many ACs of the same SDP of a slice</p>", "time": "2023-03-30T04:37:34Z"}, {"author": "Mohamed Boucadair", "text": "<p>The same comment applies for the peer-sap-id. A leaf-list is needed as an AC an be terminated by more than one peer SAP</p>", "time": "2023-03-30T04:38:13Z"}, {"author": "Dhruv Dhody", "text": "<p>ack</p>", "time": "2023-03-30T04:38:13Z"}, {"author": "Mohamed Boucadair", "text": "<p>I don't think the doc is ready for the WGLC. Some more rounds are still needed, IMO.</p>", "time": "2023-03-30T04:41:39Z"}, {"author": "Dhruv Dhody", "text": "<p>@Joel - Would traffic and Interference Isolation work, I think that is what you suggested before?</p>", "time": "2023-03-30T04:42:17Z"}, {"author": "Mohamed Boucadair", "text": "<p>Not sure why the CE loopback thing is displayed in slide 5.</p>", "time": "2023-03-30T04:51:59Z"}, {"author": "Joel Halpern", "text": "<p>@Dhruv Sorry, just turned on the chat.  To be clear, my suggestion in the email exchange is to remove alll references to interference isolation.  I understand others disagree.  I have been clear in earlier emails why I am asking for this.</p>", "time": "2023-03-30T05:03:58Z"}, {"author": "Dhruv Dhody", "text": "<p>I will add this to the issue-list to track it from YANG PoV</p>", "time": "2023-03-30T05:07:54Z"}, {"author": "Joel Halpern", "text": "<p><span class=\"user-mention\" data-user-id=\"114\">@Dhruv Dhody</span> Thank you.</p>", "time": "2023-03-30T05:08:12Z"}, {"author": "Mohamed Boucadair", "text": "<p>The L3NM/L2NM are designed to be ready to be triggered by a slice service. RFC9182 says the following: \"   'parent-service-id':  Refers to an identifier of the parent service<br>\n      (e.g., L3SM, IETF network slice, VPN+) that triggered the creation<br>\n      of the VPN service.\"</p>", "time": "2023-03-30T05:15:18Z"}, {"author": "Mohamed Boucadair", "text": "<p>The NSSM can be mapped to LxNM directly</p>", "time": "2023-03-30T05:16:14Z"}, {"author": "Lou Berger", "text": "<p>merge would be great</p>", "time": "2023-03-30T05:16:24Z"}]