12:54:59 RRSAgent has joined #web-networks 12:54:59 logging to https://www.w3.org/2022/07/21-web-networks-irc 12:55:02 Zakim has joined #web-networks 12:55:07 Meeting: Web & Networks Interest Group 12:55:59 Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-networks-ig/2022Jun/0001.html 12:57:50 sudeep has joined #web-networks 13:00:56 cpn has joined #web-networks 13:01:58 Present+ Sudeep, ChrisN, DanD, Dapeng, LarryZhao, Louay, MichaelMcCool, Song 13:03:56 McCool has joined #web-networks 13:04:16 Louay__ has joined #web-networks 13:04:34 present+ Louay_Bassbouss 13:04:58 Sudeep: our focus will be on edge computing today given the current momentum behind this topic 13:05:42 ... our goal is to identify next steps, in particular towards TPAC 13:06:14 ... we'll also talk about the upcoming TPAC 2022 13:06:23 ... and a summary of our existing & new topics in the IG 13:06:35 Topic: Edge Computing Workstream 13:06:56 -> https://github.com/w3c/edge-computing-web-exploration/ Edge Computing Exploration github repo 13:07:10 -> https://w3c.github.io/edge-computing-web-exploration/ Client-Edge-Cloud coordination Use Cases and Requirements 13:07:39 Max: I've updated the document based on the comments from the last meeting 13:07:45 ... I'll review these updates 13:07:57 ... and Michael sent a PR earlier today that we can also discuss 13:08:32 ... We've identified editors (separately from contributors) 13:08:46 ... the co-editors are Michael, Song and myself 13:09:15 ... There was also a request to highlight the benefits of offloading to the cloud or edge in the use cases 13:10:40 ... which we've done through use cases - e.g. in the Machine Learning use cases involve really intensive computing which depending on the underlying hardware may imply very different outcomes 13:10:46 ... e.g. whether they have a GPU or not 13:12:42 Michael: maybe a section summarizing the benefits would be useful 13:12:45 Max: +1 13:13:47 Max: another comment was a suggestion to refine the gap analysis 13:14:08 ... it now emphasizes what the current specs cannot support 13:14:50 Max: I think the bullet points in section 5.2 may deserve to be a section standing on its own 13:14:55 s/Max/Michael/ 13:15:01 Max: let's iterate on this indeed 13:15:17 q+ 13:15:24 Max: another update is about the the conclusion & way forward section (8.3) 13:16:11 ... we list 2 options: divide the work across existing relevant Working Groups, 13:16:23 ... or we establish a dedicated Working Group for this problem 13:17:34 ... the 2nd option helps with a unified architecture - we can coordinate with other groups as needed 13:17:37 Karen has joined #web-networks 13:17:53 ... if we agree this is the right approach, we could proceed with writing a charter 13:17:56 q+ 13:17:56 q? 13:17:58 q+ 13:18:26 Michael: I think we need to list the potential deliverables 13:18:37 ... this would help establish which may need a new Working Group 13:19:02 ... it's quite likely this would be needed, but there will also be a need to coordinate with other groups 13:19:53 Sudeep: we also need to identify the stakeholders who would need to support the work & a potential charter 13:21:36 ack McCool 13:21:37 ack cpn 13:21:40 (since I interrupted so much, I will be quiet for a while ;) 13:22:31 cpn: I think we still need to improve the understanding of requirements before proposing a WG 13:22:36 ... the exploratory work may not be a good fit for a WG 13:23:06 q+ 13:23:49 scribe+ cpn 13:24:10 Dom: Agree, CGs are more a place for the exploration 13:24:46 ... Overall I think mapping proposed solutions to new specs or changes to existing specs, protocols, APIs, there's room for pre-standardisation work 13:24:56 ack me 13:25:16 max: I agree with your points - this needs further work before proposing a WG 13:25:24 ... a CG sounds like an interesting option 13:26:28 Song: +1 on iterating in the IG or in a CG to draw a clearer picture of what we need to build 13:28:21 ... having a single group would help making progress rather than split across groups 13:28:21 q+ 13:29:17 Michael: +1 on more incubation; I think the document itself also needs more iteration 13:29:31 ... getting more and broader input on it would be good 13:29:44 ... a W3C workshop might be a good way to achieve this 13:30:29 ... a CG would be one way to do so but it has downsides, but an IG is already a good fit 13:31:00 Dom: I agree having a single group would be more comfortable 13:31:22 ... When we get to the right stage for standardisation, I expect we'd need to split it across multiple groups 13:31:30 ... e.g., WASM work going to that WG 13:32:13 ... We should look at it as a collection of useful pieces, rather than something that must be adopted all together 13:32:23 ... An option 1 approach may be more likely to get to where we want 13:32:32 q+ 13:33:02 ... On getting broader input, the first thing to do would be to publish as an IG note, which signals the group wants input on it 13:33:19 q+ 13:33:27 ... When the PR is merged, are we ready to get broader attention on the document? 13:33:58 ... For TPAC, I was thinking more of an informal workshop, could lead to a formal workshop later 13:34:29 ... Use TPAC as a way to gather presentations on the topic, prerecorded, different perspectives, to add to our thinking 13:35:05 ack me 13:35:06 ... Relevant to how edge computes intersects with the web. A formal workshop probably needs a bigger sense from the community 13:35:30 Michael: I think the document needs a bit more work before being published as an IG note - but I think we could there by the time of TPAC 13:36:05 q? 13:36:18 q+ piers 13:36:32 q+ to react on breakout session proposal 13:36:34 ack McCool 13:37:53 sudeep: +1 on gathering input from beyond the group 13:38:02 ... a mini-workshop or a breakout session at TPAC might help with that 13:38:16 ... this sounds like pre-requisites before a WG 13:39:07 max: I can look into creating a CG if there is support 13:39:35 sudeep: there will be demos from Max, Louay around edge (not necessarily edge offload) 13:39:42 q+ 13:39:54 ack sudeep 13:40:12 ... maybe we should look at organizing a formal workshop before the end of our charter 13:40:22 ... and use TPAC, this document as drivers toward that 13:41:04 Piers: any input from existing companies that provide edge services such as cloudflare, fastly 13:41:17 ... (beyond Alibaba that presumably has some as well) 13:41:56 Max: Alibaba has an edge service, but not an implementation of the proposed solution which would need more standardization support 13:42:07 ack piers 13:43:10 Dom: I hope we could attract those companies to a workshop 13:43:37 ... I agree they're critical to making this successful, we need at least two 13:44:06 Michael: +1 - we need to plan on how to attract these companies which have solutions pretty similar to what is being discussed 13:44:51 ... we should make sure the stakeholders listed in the business categories need to be well-represented 13:45:13 Louay: our demo is focused on edge in the context of 5G 13:45:48 ... we showed it at the Media Web Symposium - I plan to record it as a demo 13:46:55 Dom: Breakouts are more limited this year, 1 hour for broad visiblilty, but probably not 2 hours 13:47:32 ... Could have a longer timeslot for the TPAC meeting, that could be used for demos, or discussion 13:47:55 ... The number of people would be more limited, but would give more leeway for scheduling 13:48:07 Topic: TPAC planning 13:50:52 Sudeep: WNIG meeting on Sep 13, then breakouts on Sep 14 13:51:07 Michael: afternoon slots won't work well for remote participation to breakouts 13:51:18 Sudeep: maybe that points toward doing the mini-workshop post TPAC 13:53:33 Dom: The last breakout slot at 4:30 could be possible for people in Asia? 13:55:29 Sudeep: our agenda at TPAC will be structure around updates to our workstreams, with plenty of time for open discussion (with room for a possible guest speaker) 13:55:50 ... it'll be posted on the wiki 13:57:17 Topic: Updates on other topics 13:57:54 Piers: the work on monitoring in IETF is on hold, but there is work happening in CTA WAVE around this 13:58:29 Chris: I'm talking with that group in the context of the Media & Entertainment IG - let's approach them together 13:59:56 (sorry, I have to go, another call with SDW...) 14:00:01 Sudeep: not much progress on link performance prediction; haven't seen much progress on priority control either 14:00:50 ... on Edge Computing, good progress on our offloading; not seeing lots of progress in intersection between MEC & Web 14:01:00 ... Not much anew on network emulation either 14:01:34 ... New topics have emerged recently: exposing network slicing (which are now exposed e.g. in Android) 14:02:18 ... We also received feedback from the Games CG on the network APIs gap e.g. for download progress information 14:04:41 Dom: the Winter CG is looking at making browser APIs into non-browser runtimes such as node, deno, cloudflare worker 14:04:50 ... possibly interesting overlap with our offloading explorations 14:05:12 Sudeep: also potential interest around multicast receiver for Web using edge nodes 14:05:20 RRSAgent, draft minutes 14:05:20 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/07/21-web-networks-minutes.html dom 14:05:24 RRSAgent, make log public 14:05:52 Present+ Huaqi 14:05:54 RRSAgent, draft minutes 14:05:58 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/07/21-web-networks-minutes.html dom 14:05:59 Present+ PeipeiGuo 14:06:00 RRSAgent, draft minutes 14:06:00 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/07/21-web-networks-minutes.html dom 14:06:19 Chair: Sudeep, Song, DanD 14:06:48 i/ Sudeep: our focus/Scribe+ dom 14:06:50 RRSAgent, draft minutes 14:06:50 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/07/21-web-networks-minutes.html dom 14:07:35 i/Meeting:/Scribe+ dom 14:07:37 RRSAgent, draft minutes 14:07:37 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/07/21-web-networks-minutes.html dom 15:27:39 Karen has joined #web-networks 16:15:00 Karen has joined #web-networks 16:25:46 Zakim has left #web-networks 16:41:18 Karen has joined #web-networks 18:35:00 Karen has joined #web-networks