Draft and slides

[Michael Welzl]

Dear all,

After a few more small updates, I submitted our draft this Monday:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-welzl-panrg-oppd/

Today, I have uploaded a first version of slides for the side meeting to our github - please take a look, I’d be happy to receive any comments or updates!

https://github.com/mwelzl/oppd/tree/main/slides

Is there anything more that we should present?

How about more details on SMAQ and Sidekick?   Regarding the latter, Gina will give a short update of our Sidekick work in PANRG, which is from 15:30-17:00 on the day of our meeting…  maybe it would be a bit strange to repeat this presentation again just ~ 2 hours later.

But perhaps we should ask someone to present what SCONE ideas for discovery people may already have?  Does anyone know of a SCONEr who already works on this, or should we just ask on their list when we tell them about this side meeting?

Cheers,

Michael

[Joerg Ott]

Hi Michael,

gradually getting through things...

First of, thanks a lot for putting this together!

> After a few more small updates, I submitted our draft this Monday:

> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-welzl-panrg-oppd/ <https://
> datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-welzl-panrg-oppd/>

>
> Today, I have uploaded a first version of slides for the side meeting to
> our github - please take a look, I’d be happy to receive any comments or
> updates!

> https://github.com/mwelzl/oppd/tree/main/slides <https://github.com/
> mwelzl/oppd/tree/main/slides>

>
> Is there anything more that we should present?
> How about more details on SMAQ and Sidekick?   Regarding the latter,
> Gina will give a short update of our Sidekick work in PANRG, which is
> from 15:30-17:00 on the day of our meeting…  maybe it would be a bit
> strange to repeat this presentation again just ~ 2 hours later.

I would suggest keeping the specifics to a minimum because we don't want
to end up discussing the validity of our use cases. If anything, let's
rather touch upon further use cases than our special ones.

One could even leave out the "results slide" (is it worth it?). I
recall quite a few times the point being made that performance should
work end-to-end without further assistance, so arguing performance
improvement should not be overdone because people might quickly turn
down the need.

> But perhaps we should ask someone to present what SCONE ideas for
> discovery people may already have?  Does anyone know of a SCONEr who
> already works on this, or should we just ask on their list when we tell
> them about this side meeting?

Let's decide after we see how SCONE went :-)

Cheers,
Jörg


> --
> https://github.com/mwelzl/oppd <https://github.com/mwelzl/oppd>
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "oppd-ietf" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to oppd-ietf+...@googlegroups.com <mailto:oppd-
> ietf+uns...@googlegroups.com>.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/
> msgid/oppd-ietf/0E1C9917-C8E0-4C8C-B856-BE7132C7FE3F%40ifi.uio.no
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/oppd-ietf/0E1C9917-C8E0-4C8C-B856-
> BE7132C7FE3F%40ifi.uio.no?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

[Michael Welzl]

Hi !

> On Nov 6, 2024, at 12:36 PM, Joerg Ott <o...@in.tum.de> wrote:
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> gradually getting through things...
>
> First of, thanks a lot for putting this together!
>
>> After a few more small updates, I submitted our draft this Monday:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-welzl-panrg-oppd/ <https:// datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-welzl-panrg-oppd/>
>> Today, I have uploaded a first version of slides for the side meeting to our github - please take a look, I’d be happy to receive any comments or updates!
>> https://github.com/mwelzl/oppd/tree/main/slides <https://github.com/ mwelzl/oppd/tree/main/slides>
>> Is there anything more that we should present?
>> How about more details on SMAQ and Sidekick? Regarding the latter, Gina will give a short update of our Sidekick work in PANRG, which is from 15:30-17:00 on the day of our meeting… maybe it would be a bit strange to repeat this presentation again just ~ 2 hours later.
>
> I would suggest keeping the specifics to a minimum because we don't want to end up discussing the validity of our use cases. If anything, let's rather touch upon further use cases than our special ones.

I only know of our two and SCONE; anyway, we need to have examples, and that’s what they are.

> One could even leave out the "results slide" (is it worth it?). I recall quite a few times the point being made that performance should work end-to-end without further assistance, so arguing performance improvement should not be overdone because people might quickly turn down the need.

I’ll keep this short, but I do think it’s necessary to add - I added the slide because Lars, in Raitenhaslach, said that the slides must be clearer about: “what’s the point? Why do this?”.
After all, the strict need to be on-path is for performance improvement only. Perhaps people now understand better that QUIC over Satellite (as just one example) just doesn’t work well…

>> But perhaps we should ask someone to present what SCONE ideas for discovery people may already have? Does anyone know of a SCONEr who already works on this, or should we just ask on their list when we tell them about this side meeting?
>
> Let's decide after we see how SCONE went :-)

Ok - though it _is_ a WG now…

Cheers,
Michael