# CoRE Virtual interim - 2021-07-07 - 14:00 UTC Chairs: * Marco Tiloca, RISE * Jaime Jiménez, Ericsson ## Remote instructions material: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/interim-2021-core-09/session/core webex: https://ietf.webex.com/ietf/j.php?MTID=m9e7a5d60740a53d0694df4397a9cbe8c jabber: core@jabber.ietf.org codimd: https://codimd.ietf.org/notes-ietf-interim-2021-core-09-core?both Minute takers: Marco Tiloca Jabber scribes: ## Participants 1. Marco Tiloca, RISE 2. Francesca Palombini 3. Rikard Höglund 4. Klaus Hartke 5. Carsten Bormann, TZI 6. Peter Yee, AKAYLA 7. Henk Birkholz 8. Alan Soloway, Qualcomm 9. Michael Richardson *[MT]: Marco Tiloca *[JJ]: Jaime Jiménez *[FP]: Francesca Palombini *[CB]: Carsten Bormann *[CA]: Christian Amsüss *[KH]: Klaus Hartke *[RH]: Rikard Höglund *[TF]: Thomas Fossati *[DN]: David Navarro *[GS]: Göran Selander *[BS]: Bilhanan Silverajan *[AS]: Alan Soloway *[MR]: Michael Richardson *[AK]: Ari Keränen *[MJK]: Michael Koster *[JM]: John Mattsson *[NW]: Niklas Widell *[ED]: Esko Dijk *[EB]: Henk Birkholz ## Agenda ### Note Well Remember that the [note well](https://datatracker.ietf.org/submit/note-well/) applies, for [IPR](https://tools.ietf.org/html/bcp79) but also for [WG processes](https://tools.ietf.org/html/bcp25) and [code of conduct](https://tools.ietf.org/html/bcp54). Try to be nice. ### Bluesheets / Jabber & Minutes / Agenda bashing Fill the "Participants" list and other info above. ### HREF https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-core-href/ Slides from the CoRE interim on 2021-06-23: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/interim-2021-core-08/materials/slides-interim-2021-core-08-sessa-href-musings-01.pdf - "Tweaked-array syntax" (aka Option 3) - Carsten's PR: https://github.com/core-wg/coral/pull/76 - Christian's implementation: https://gitlab.com/chrysn/micrurus/-/commit/4963ed5308c1e68c07aa970a05a6b822fc8467b5 - discard=True against authority-less schemes - discard=all doesn't mean ```/```, see https://github.com/core-wg/coral/issues/77 - See "file" scheme: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8089 CB: Christian says he likes it (Option 3 above) and then I think we are done. MT: Weren't you also implementing it? CB: Yes, I'm still working on it. I can't add anything more. MT: Good to have also your implementation done and checked against Christian's. MT: Thoughts from Henk and Klaus? HB: I see no blockers and we should move on. MT: So you also support Option 3? HB: I can't remember the option numbering, but hadn't changed my mind since last interim (Later offline checking: indeed Option 3 as "0-2 bytes waste option") KH: This proposal needs some more verification, we have a GH issue https://github.com/core-wg/coral/issues/58 on the equivalence to RFC 3986 and on our own reference resolution algorithm. I guess Carsten's has taken care of that, if all that matters is Christian's input I have nothing more to add. MT: Christian also wanted to check both ways to have a better opinion. MT: So we need some more feedback from implementations. ( Showing https://github.com/core-wg/coral/issues/77 ) CB: Christian said he likes the result. Last minute surprise on authority-less scheme, and we need to check it. Hopefully no more surprises come but I'm positive. MT: About this corner case, you also wanted to check RFC 8089 to have a better opinion. CB: Still on my todo list. ### SenML data-ct https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-core-senml-data-ct/ * Carsten's PR - https://github.com/core-wg/senml-data-ct/pull/3 CB: Took out the material we needed from different RFCs and added it here; most of it used to add content with ABNF. Looks good. CB: Done some check against errata and need to be continued; nothing bad found so far. (Checking the new ABNF content) CB: Maybe ABNF could be done just better, but just copied over and good enough to finish this document. MT: I checked your PR, it looks good. Ari said it's good too. MT: One editorial thing, "Content-Format-Spec" shows up here, but not earlier in the document. You can use it when you give a pointer to the ABNF part. CB: I was struggling when defining names. MT: Names are fine, just thinking to actually use "Content-Format-Spec" earlier in the document. CB: Yes, can do as editorial improvements MT: Plan to resubmit by the cut-off? CB: Yes ### CORECONF documents Status check * https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-core-yang-cbor/ https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-core-sid/ CB: -yang-cbor and -sid got the expected changes in their latest version -16. They are now in "Waiting for AD Go-Ahead". FP: Got the message. CB: Next is to get them on the telechat? FP: Will check with the shepherd and fix the action holder in the meanwhile. MT: As shepherd of -yang-cbor, the write-up is already up-to-date with version -16. FP: The IESG appreciates up-to-date write-ups. Will take a look now during the meeting. (later at the end of the meeting) FP: For -sid, got update answers from Ivaylo and they look good. No answers from the YANG Doctors, so I guess that's just fine too. There's a comment from the CoAP content-format expert, maybe on the call? Not sure it's addressed. CB: I think we addressed it. What's left is something redundantly repeated and should not be. Though I think I fixed that. CB: That's the input from Klaus about the media-types part. That should be done now. Does this document have IANA OK? FP: It's "Review needed" from "IANA NOT OK". I guess, it will be re-reviewed when I push for the telechat. CB: The other points were reference and we fixed them. KH: -sid should have a green light now or soon. For -yang-cbor I got the review request today. FP: Then I wait for you, or should I move ahead? (if no green light, I put DISCUSS). KH: I can provide the review today or tomorrow. CB: How does it work for scheduling discussions in the telechat. FP: Need to request the slot latest one week before. So if I request by tomorrow, it will be discussed next week. Otherwise it gets delayed also with IETF 111 in between. CB: Would be good to have it in the next telechat. FP: Ok, will move ahead and wait for Klaus' review. CB: Sounds good. KH: Sounds good. CB: The other document is -comi. We have some editorial issues (see link below) that were part of my shepherd report. These are no blockers, but work to be done. * https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-core-comi/ CB: There's an open point related to mail and section below (https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/core/Iu4CAXJRnttY9IjYbkhTrabQwjg/) * https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-core-comi-11#page-14 see also CB: When you build a request in COMI with (audio chopping ...) the mapping depends on the base YANG data type. There was a lot of discussion in NETCONF, it's possible. We can attach different semantics to different YANG base data types. The table and its content are consistent with YANG, but it's a surprise for an implementor. What the request says looks different depending on what the YANG specification says. CB: We haven't found out why we're doing this, I'd like to simplify it to reduce the surprise effect. That requires input from the authors, who are difficult to reach. CB: Anybody here caring about these URI query components? HB: This can be an inspiration in general for other domains using YANG, CoAP Observe telemetry for YANG and YANG pushed. I care a bit but no surprised so no barrier of concern. In theory, you can do these things in the URI itself. I'm neutral, I don't see it as a surprise. CB: Ultimately need to find the answer to why it is that way, and we seriously don't know, then maybe we can just fix it. * https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-core-yang-library/ CB: Finally -yang-library, which relies on anything else being in order. This will finish last or together with -comi. ### AOB MT: After today we'll have a 2-hour session at IETF 111 on Wednesday 28. We'll resume interim meetings on Meetecho, in mid-September alternating with the CBOR weeks. Expected same day of the week and time as in this series of interim meetings.