Re: [alto] Murray Kucherawy's Discuss on draft-ietf-alto-cost-mode-04: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[[e-mail]]

Hi Murray, 

Thanks for the review. 

Please see inline. 

Cheers,
Med

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Murray Kucherawy via Datatracker <[e-mail]>
> Envoyé : jeudi 2 juin 2022 08:16
> À : The IESG <[e-mail]>
> Cc : [e-mail]; [e-mail];
> [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> Objet : Murray Kucherawy's Discuss on draft-ietf-alto-cost-mode-
> 04: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
> 
> Murray Kucherawy has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-alto-cost-mode-04: Discuss
> 
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to
> all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to
> cut this introductory paragraph, however.)
> 
> 
> Please refer to
> https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-
> positions/
> for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT
> positions.
> 
> 
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found
> here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-cost-mode/
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----
> DISCUSS:
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----
> 
> Paul said:
> 
> > I think that SHOULD can be a MUST. Although one could question
> the 2119 usage
> as it seems to be a directive to a document author and not a
> protocol action.
> So I would also be okay with lowercasing this.
> 
> I'm ambivalent about the first sentence, but I concur strongly
> with the second;
> use of BCP 14 language to establish a requirement against some
> future document
> seems quite unconventional to me.  Can we talk about why this is
> necessary
> and/or appropriate?

[Med] That wording was on purpose. We could easily turn that text into the following:

NEW:
 If the definition of a cost mode does not indicate whether it
 applies to a subset of cost metrics, ALTO implementations
 MUST be prepared to accept that cost mode for any cost metric.

... but there is a high risk that this behavior will overlooked and thus the default mode will be the rule. This would have interoperability implications as it is likely that some modes can't be associated with all cost metrics. 

The SHOULD is some sort of authors guideline to assess the applicability and record it.  


_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.