Subject: [Mops] Draft minutes from 2020-Apr interim

From: Kyle Rose <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2020 08:52:15 -0400

I've pasted the draft minutes from our Ides of April interim below. Thanks
again to Olufemi Komolafe for volunteering! Please review and provide
clarifications and/or corrections to the chairs. Otherwise, we'll be
posting the minutes to the data tracker in a week at which point it will be
part of your Permanent Record.

Kyle

Media OPerationS (MOPS) WG

April 2020 Virtual Interim
Wednesday, April 15, 2020 20h00UTC-21h30UTC

Webex details below

Agenda

Intro

Agenda Bashing [5min] chair(s)

Review of concrete work items:

[15min] Draft of edge network operational considerations for streaming media
Jake Holland
draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons
Github - https://github.com/ietf-wg-mops/draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons
Accepting comments via GitHub issues
Presented update on draft
Discussion on “Soliciting Contributions - Proposed Template”
     + have in current draft or perhaps produce new draft (BCP?)
Matt Stock: Like template and sees potential
Jake Holland: Appreciates feedback.  Potential to write diffrent BCPs,
targeted at diffrent audience
Spencer Dawkins: Aim is for draft to not only call out potential bad things
but rather try to be actionable, hence why mitigations are solicited
Glenn Deen: +1 on collecting mitigations and sees potential in this
highlighting potential areas of interest/work. Mitigations are only a first
step, and where there are really egregious problems the mitigation may be a
temporary approach and the issue may trigger additional work relevant to
the IETF.
Matt Stock: Mitigations may not be black/white but rather may involve
tradeoffs which should be called out to inform decision-making
Leslie Daigle: Maybe collect the issues as a starting point
Spencer Dawkins: Thanks to both Glenn and Matt for these excellent
suggestions

Updates from elsewhere

Updates from other work
[15min] Sanjay Mishra - anything from SVA Open Caching WG
Described significant impact COVID-19 having on video traffic seeing by
carriers
Discussed ongoing and potential work of interest in SVA and potential new
working groups
Glenn Deen: Recent work in SVA working group on media use cases for
multicast streaming that may be of interest
Jake Holland: Work looks interesting.  What does engagement with SVA look
like?  SVA members commenting on IETF mailing list? Interested to hear more
about the multicast work
Sanjay Mishra: Perhaps bring back updates/proble statements etc from SVA to
IETF, IETF can work on these items and perhaps SVA consumes the output
Spencer Dawkins: Thanks for discussion on COVID-19 impact on video traffic
Glenn Deen: Address potential issue regarding IPR raised by Jake Holland.
There should be no issues - SVA docs are published on the web for all to
read and IP issues shouldn't enter into MOPS working with SVA use csses. If
still concerned, please come talk to [email-masked] - I'm on the SVA
board.

[5min] Glenn Deen -- anything further re SMPTE

[15min] Maxim Sharabayko SRT — see
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sh arabayko-mops-srt/ , posted on
MOPS mailing list
Overview of potential benefits SRT
Jake Holland: Questions about protocol and operational use.  Suitable for
contribution/distribution or livestreaming to end-users?
Max Sharabayko: SRT is well-suited for media
Marc Cymontkowski: Use of UDP means not SRT is not direct
What other protocols were considered and what was deficient about them?
Marc Cymontkowski: Original goal was to transmit live stream over public
internet. Came to problem with clean slate and started with UDP and added
enhancements to make it more suited for real-time traffic.
Kyle Rose: With hindsight, starting off with RTP may have been a better
option at the start, a few years ago.
Glenn Deen: Comcast use SRT significantly and so keen for this work to
succeed.  What are the current priorities for RTP?
Marc Cymontkowski: Redundancy, balancing data of multiple links, congestion
control
Glenn Denn: Congestion control of interest - as playing nicely with the
network is in everyone's best interest
Leslie Daigle: Potential interest in this WG in this protocol.  Detailed
protocol machinery discussions will be done in other WGs but MOPS interested
Spencer Dawkins: An Independent Stream draft on SRT as it exists today will
be of great value to MOPS, because we would have a good reference for the
protocol as we start to make recommendations on use of SRT for streaming
operators. That was the recommendation for a first step from Dispatch
discussion on SRT as I understood it, although the current IESG might
change that recommendation.

Alex Gouaillard: Discussion in other WGs regarding SRT, especially concerns
regarding security
- When presented at IETF dispatch, concerned were expressed by long time
IETF contributors like Eric Rescorla, Colin Perkins, Martin Thompson
discussion here:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dispatch/ekMWlMXch132tvri2BwrnnULzuw/
- The question was just about the status of those discussions as, given the
position of the people asking with respect to security, media transport,
QUIC, SRTP, at IETF, those questions will come back at one point.
- One of the question raised on the Dispatch thread was also, why at mops
and not in ART, since it looks more in scope for the later.
- Another question was regarding security definition (eric/martin)
- another question, more generic, is why a new protocol when it looks like
webrtc / QUIC are a good match to the announced goal (nat traversal, TLS
1.3, CC, BWE, ...)
=> discussion on dispatch would have concluded by a request for a document,
and thus is pending this document availability.

Operational Issues Observed
[15min] Jake Holland — Experience making the world safe for interdomain
multicast
Discussed some of the challenges/opportunities with interdomain multicast
Outlined goals for 2020 & eager to collaborate in trials/POCs so please
reach out if interested
Leslie Daigle: Interesting overview

AOB
[10min]  Liaison Statement from SC 29/WG 11 to IETF MOPS WG (SC 29 N 18620)
Spencer Dawkins: Spoke to Stephan Wegner, the IAB liaison manager for SC
29/WG 11, on Monday; he had no further updates beyond what was in the
original liaison statement they sent to IETF.

Leslie Daigle: Git repo set up for WG
Kyle Rose: Repo will be used when documents are adopted.  Not mandatory but
convenient for collaboration.  Will send URL on list shortly

---

From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2020 09:45:35 -0500

Hi, Kyle,

> part of your Permanent Record.

Thanks for the excellent start on minutes. I have a couple of notes below.

Best,

Spencer

> Spencer Dawkins: Aim is for draft to not only call out potential bad
> things but rather try to be actionable, hence why mitigations are solicited
Updates from elsewhere
> Sanjay Mishra: Perhaps bring back updates/proble statements etc from SVA
> to IETF, IETF can work on these items and perhaps SVA consumes the output
> Spencer Dawkins: Thanks for discussion on COVID-19 impact on video
> traffic.
>

This could be "Thanks for discussion on COVID-19 impact on video traffic,
with references. draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons now has a section on
"Unpredictable Usage Profiles", and the authors have been talking about
mentioning COVID-19 as well.

> still concerned, please come talk to [email-masked] - I'm on the
> SVA board.
>
>
>
> Marc Cymontkowski: Redundancy, balancing data of multiple links,
> congestion control
> Spencer Dawkins: An Independent Stream draft on SRT as it exists today
> will be of great value to MOPS, because we would have a good reference for
> the protocol as we start to make recommendations on use of SRT for
> streaming operators. That was the recommendation for a first step from
> Dispatch discussion on SRT as I understood it, although the current IESG
> might change that recommendation.
>

My last sentence would be clearer as "That was the recommendation for a
first step from Dispatch discussion on SRT as I understood it, although the
final direction would be up to the responsible area directors"..

>
> Alex Gouaillard: Discussion in other WGs regarding SRT, especially
> concerns regarding security
> - The question was just about the status of those discussions as, given
> the position of the people asking with respect to security, media
> transport, QUIC, SRTP, at IETF, those questions will come back at one point.

that's probably "for the latter".

> => discussion on dispatch would have concluded by a request for a
> document, and thus is pending this document availability.
>
>
>
> Kyle Rose: Repo will be used when documents are adopted.  Not mandatory
> but convenient for collaboration.  Will send URL on list shortly
>
>
> --
> Mops mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops
>