Eric Boyd wrote:
Next meeting is Tuesday, March 1 at 11 AM ET (the usual time).

Dial +1-734-531-0125 or +1-800-541-1710 and enter access code 0142286

Agenda TBD (basically recap from last meeting).

--Eric

Eric L. Boyd
Manager, Performance Architecture & Technologies
eboyd@internet2.edu
734-352-7032 (work)
734-834-6708 (cell)

Internet2
1000 Oakbrook Drive, Suite 300
Ann Arbor, MI 48104

ACTION ITEM:

  1. Mark to incorporate a parameter list – based on the group agreement.
  2. Mark to draft a strawman proposal regarding the second unresolved issue (packet types – required or optional?) and send it to the list for comment.
  3. Mark to note that all elements of TimeInformation are non-mandatory – based on the group agreement.
  4. Mark will include the option for specific parameters to be marked as ‘required’ or ‘optional’.
  5. Richard will go to the standard body (i.e., NIST) to get an international ‘standard’ for Mbps, Mb/s, etc.
  6. Mark to take nm_params units for numPackets out of the document.
  7. Brian and Dan will provide Eric and Susan with information ; Internet2 will host the GGF NM-WG page. It will be redesigned and vetted by the group. Brian will continue to host the page until it is ready and then will create a redirect. Susan will ensure that WG chairs (Richard, Eric, and Mark) have editing authority to the page. (Page to be up before mid-March, next GGF).
  8. Group agreed that the final document will include all three elements listed above.
  9. Group agreed to expand the schema to define the event types by specifying what output would be produced (delay, rtt, raw ping output).
  10. Martin to send the output and code from the tools that were demoed to the list.
  11. Group agreed to reach consensus on delay.rtt, bw.achievable, delay.oneWay, and link.utilization via the list.
  12. Martin will send Richard/Mark information on the state-of-the-art at that point. Discussion to be held off-line.
  13. Richard (and co-chairs) will request the meeting at the GGF Chicago meeting (June).
  14. Implementers of the schema should report back to the mailing list on the reasons items were included/changed to document problems.
--Susan