Thanks, Benoit. This was a product of multiple minutes takers (thank you Rob for all the work you do on minutes!). Both were under the manifest section, but I combined them nonetheless.
Joe From: Benoit Claise <benoit.claise=40huawei....@dmarc.ietf.org> Date: Wednesday, November 16, 2022 at 05:29 To: Joe Clarke (jclarke) <jcla...@cisco.com>, opsawg@ietf.org <opsawg@ietf.org> Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] MINUTES: IETF 115 OPSAWG/Ops Area meeting Hi Joe, Regarding: A Data Manifest for Contextualized Telemetry Data There are two distinct parts, which should be combined IMO. 1. · Alex Clemm: What is different from using the subscription ID from YANG Push? · Benoit: If you lose access to the device, how will you backtrack to get that information? This is where the manifest comes in · Alex: The client should still store the subscription data and/or subscribe to the subscription details as well · Benoit: Indeed · Rob: How is this different than what we have today? You can read YANG Library today. · Benoit: There is already YANG library, but how will you know if the device has changed? You want to know the context from the platform to know it changed so you can identify when, for example, a bug has been fixed (i.e., the before and after) · Rob: I think this is a good problem to be working on, but I have not read this draft to know if this is the right way to solve that problem · Henk: Huge domain of metadata; if you look at integrity, there will need to be a lot of extensions to attest things like platform. This could turn into a large amount of metadata as other groups layer their work into this; this has the potential to be a very broad extension point · Benoit: I agree. That may be needed to solve the closed-loop automation problem. · Henk: Make sure that your scheme has fore-thought on extensibility · Diego Lopez: We are starting to scratch the surface on integrity · Many people in the room have read the document; AI: cal for adoption after 115 2. Creating an extension point here, that will be used. Benoit: I agree that we will need more and more of these to solve the closed loop, and I would agree with you statement. Henk: Plesae try and cross-polinate this idea and make sure that we considering these extensions. Diego: We are just starting at scratching services, have been discussing with (Jean) on how we can do this efficiently (i.e, in a compact way). Regards, Benoit On 11/15/2022 8:05 PM, Joe Clarke (jclarke) wrote: Hello, WG. The first revision of the opsawg/Ops Area 115 minutes have been posted to https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/115/materials/minutes-115-opsawg-00. These take into account Michael’s missing MUD slides and talk (those slides are now in Data Tracker). In terms of AIs, we are working through them. The WG LC on RADIUS secure DNS has been concluded, and a shepherd is being sought. Expect more LCs and CfAs on other work shortly. Let us know if you find errors or omissions in the minutes. Thanks. Joe _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list OPSAWG@ietf.org<mailto:OPSAWG@ietf.org> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
_______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list OPSAWG@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
