CDNI WG Minutes
          IETF-111 Online
          Chairs: Kevin Ma and Sanjay Mishra
          AD: Francesca Palombini
          
          Agenda and Slides: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/111/session/cdni
          Recording: http://www.meetecho.com/ietf111/recordings#CDNI
          
          Chair slides (Kevin J. Ma)
          --------------------------
          Kevin: RFC8804 published since last meeting at IETF-103
          
          CDNI URI Signing (Phil Sorber)
          ------------------------------
          Phil: If anyone has input or suggestions on IESG comments, please email
          or submit a PR
          
          Chris Lemmons (chat): Agree with Kevin's proposal wrt staying off
          marks lawn
          
          Chris: Will propose some text and submit PRs
          
          Kevin: Can we address the remaining comments by IETF-112
          
          Phil: Should be able to finish by IETF-112
          
          HTTPS Delegation (Frederic Fieau)
          ---------------------------------
          Frederic: More prototyping to be done.
          
          Frederic: Are we ready for WGLC?
          
          Kevin: Is the draft ready, or are we waiting on dependencies beyond
          ACME STAR.
          
          Kevin: I can do a preliminary review if we are really ready.
          
          Frederic: ACME STAR RFC is published, but others are still waiting.
          
          Sanjay: We should consider splitting out just the ACME STAR portion.
          
          Guillaume Bichot: Any reason only PathMatch and not also HostMatch
          support.
          
          Frederic: Open to suggestions.
          
          Kevin: We still have time to make changes, we should take the discussion
          to the list.
          
          CDNI Triggers (Nir Sopher)
          --------------------------
          Nir: New functions: Error propagation, Content Selection, and message
          format.
          
          Kevin: We're running behind, please comment on threads on the list.
          
          Nir: Request WG adoption of rfc8007bis draft.
          
          Kevin: We already adopted draft-ietf-cdni-triggers-extensions after
          IETF-103, and draft-sopher-cdni-ci-triggers-rfc8007bis-01 is really
          a rev of draft-ietf-cdni-triggers-extensions after we decided that it
          makes more sense to replace RFC8007, so it makes sense to adopt?
          no objections.
          
          Francesca: Does this require rechartering (is this a new protocol)?
          
          Kevin: We had decided that this was functionality that really should
          have been in RFC8007, so it is really the same protocol, just fixing
          things we missed.
          
          Kevin: We will take it to the list.
          
          CDNI Metadata (Glenn Goldstein)
          -------------------------------
          Glenn: The draft is light on details; high level descriptions taken from
          much larger SVA spec.
          
          Kevin: It was always the intent of CDNI to let vendors add their own,
          operationally useful, metadata.
          
          Kevin: Please add more details to the draft and everyone please comment
          on the list.
          
          Capacity Advertisement: (Andrew Ryan)
          -------------------------------------
          Andrew: Like Glenn's draft, this draft is light on details; taken from
          a much larger SVA spec.
          
          Kevin: Is it just metadata and FCI objects, or is there protocol work
          that might conflict with ALTO?
          
          Andrew: SVA is developing their own transport protocol, but the draft
          only covers metadata and FCI.
          
          Kevin: Please add more details to the draft and everyone please comment
          on the list
          
          CDNI Footprints (Nir Sopher)
          ----------------------------
          Nir: New ISO3166-2Code and footprint union footprint types
          
          Nir: Request WG adoption of footprint draft
          
          Kevin: ISO3166-2Code makes sense, and footprint union is something we
          missed originally; both are straight forward and make sense, so I see
          no reason not to adopt?
          
          no objections.
          
          Kevin: We will take it to the list.
          
          Session closed.