Re: [auth48] AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9322 <draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-flags-10> for your review

["Spiegel, Mickey" <[e-mail]>]

I approve this document.

Please update my contact details to the following:

Mickey Spiegel
Intel
101 Innovation Drive
San Jose, CA 95134
United States of America
Email: [e-mail]


-----Original Message-----
From: Frank Brockners (fbrockne) <[e-mail]> 
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2022 12:38 PM
To: Megan Ferguson <[e-mail]>; Tal Mizrahi <[e-mail]>; Spiegel, Mickey <[e-mail]>; Tommy Pauly <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Cc: RFC Errata System <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: RE: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9322 <draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-flags-10> for your review

Hi Megan, RFC Editor team,

Thanks for your work on this document. I agree with Tal's suggestions - and approve the document.

Similar to the DEX draft, the editorial changes that were done to my address render it wrong. The "3rd floor" apply to the building, not the Cisco office within the building, so either omit the "3rd floor" or put it below the "Hansaallee 249".

OLD:
   Frank Brockners
   Cisco Systems, Inc.
   3rd Floor
   Hansaallee 249
   40549 Duesseldorf
   Germany
   Email: [e-mail]

NEW
   Frank Brockners
   Cisco Systems, Inc.
   Hansaallee 249
   40549 Duesseldorf
   Germany
   Email: [e-mail]

Thanks again, Frank

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Megan Ferguson <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Friday, 7 October 2022 15:11
> To: Tal Mizrahi <[e-mail]>; Frank Brockners 
> (fbrockne) <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; Tommy Pauly 
> <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; 
> [e-mail]
> Cc: RFC Errata System <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; 
> ippm- [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9322 <draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-flags-10> 
> for your review
> 
> Authors,
> 
> Just a friendly reminder that this document is awaiting response from 
> the majority of you.
> 
> Please see the updated files below and contact us at your earliest 
> convenience with either your approval of the document in its current 
> form or any updates you may have.
> 
> The files are viewable at:
> 
>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9322.txt
>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9322.pdf
>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9322.html
>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9322.xml
> 
> The relevant diff files are at:
> 
>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9322-diff.html (comprehensive diff)
>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9322-rfcdiff.html 
> (comprehensive
> rfcdiff)
>   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9322-auth48diff.html (AUTH48 
> changes
> only)
> 
> The AUTH48 status page is viewable at:
> 
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9322
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> RFC Editor/mf
> 
> 
> > On Sep 26, 2022, at 1:37 PM, Megan Ferguson <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
> >
> > Greetings,
> >
> > Thank you for your reply.  We have updated the AUTH48 status page to 
> > reflect your approval and the file with any updates requested.
> >
> > Please note that we will assume your assent to any further changes 
> > submitted by your coauthors unless we hear otherwise at that time.
> >
> > The files are viewable at:
> >
> >   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9322.txt
> >   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9322.pdf
> >   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9322.html
> >   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9322.xml
> >
> > The relevant diff files are at:
> >
> >   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9322-diff.html (comprehensive diff)
> >   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9322-rfcdiff.html 
> > (comprehensive
> rfcdiff)
> >   https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9322-auth48diff.html (AUTH48 
> > changes only)
> >
> > The AUTH48 status page is viewable at:
> >
> > http://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9322
> >
> > Thank you.
> >
> > RFC Editor/mf
> >
> >
> >
> >> On Sep 22, 2022, at 4:39 AM, Tal Mizrahi 
> >> <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Dear RFC Editor team,
> >>
> >> Many thanks for your work on this document.
> >> I approve.
> >>
> >> Please see my replies below, marked by [TM].
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Tal.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 11:23 PM <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Authors,
> >>>
> >>> While reviewing this document during AUTH48, please resolve (as
> necessary) the following questions, which are also in the XML file.
> >>>
> >>> 1) <!--[rfced] FYI - we have updated the Mickey's organization
> >>>    information in the header for brevity.  Please let us know any
> >>>    objections. -->
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 2) <!--[rfced] Please review our update to lowercase "loopback" in 
> >>> the
> following text to ensure that this does not change your intended meaning.
> >>>
> >>> Original:
> >>>
> >>> Similar techniques can be applied by an IOAM encapsulating node to 
> >>> apply Loopback to a subset of the forwarded traffic.
> >>>
> >>> Current:
> >>> Similar techniques can be applied by an IOAM encapsulating node to 
> >>> apply loopback to a subset of the forwarded traffic.
> >>> -->
> >>
> >> [TM] Makes sense.
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 3) <!--[rfced] Should "transit packet" be plural in this sentence to create
> >>>    parallel structure?
> >>>
> >>> Original:
> >>> An attacker that sets this flag, either in synthetic packets or 
> >>> transit packet, can potentially cause an amplification...
> >>>
> >>> Perhaps:
> >>> An attacker that sets this flag, either in synthetic packets or 
> >>> transit packets, can potentially cause an amplification...-->
> >>>
> >>
> >> [TM] Yes, please go ahead and apply this change.
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> 4)   <!--[rfced] Throughout the document, we used the following capping
> >>>      schemes to match use in RFC 9197. Please let us know any
> >>>      objections.
> >>>
> >>> IOAM data fields to IOAM-Data-Fields IOAM domain(s) to
> >>> IOAM-Domain(s)
> >>>
> >>
> >> [TM] Makes sense.
> >>
> >>> -->
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Thank you.
> >>>
> >>> RFC Editor/mc/mf
> >>>
> >>> *****IMPORTANT*****
> >>>
> >>> Updated 2022/09/21
> >>>
> >>> RFC Author(s):
> >>> --------------
> >>>
> >>> Instructions for Completing AUTH48
> >>>
> >>> Your document has now entered AUTH48.  Once it has been reviewed 
> >>> and approved by you and all coauthors, it will be published as an RFC.
> >>> If an author is no longer available, there are several remedies 
> >>> available as listed in the FAQ (https://www.rfc-editor.org/faq/).
> >>>
> >>> You and you coauthors are responsible for engaging other parties 
> >>> (e.g., Contributors or Working Group) as necessary before 
> >>> providing your approval.
> >>>
> >>> Planning your review
> >>> ---------------------
> >>>
> >>> Please review the following aspects of your document:
> >>>
> >>> *  RFC Editor questions
> >>>
> >>>  Please review and resolve any questions raised by the RFC Editor 
> >>> that have been included in the XML file as comments marked as
> >>>  follows:
> >>>
> >>>  <!-- [rfced] ... -->
> >>>
> >>>  These questions will also be sent in a subsequent email.
> >>>
> >>> *  Changes submitted by coauthors
> >>>
> >>>  Please ensure that you review any changes submitted by your 
> >>> coauthors.  We assume that if you do not speak up that you  agree 
> >>> to changes submitted by your coauthors.
> >>>
> >>> *  Content
> >>>
> >>>  Please review the full content of the document, as this cannot 
> >>> change once the RFC is published.  Please pay particular attention to:
> >>>  - IANA considerations updates (if applicable)
> >>>  - contact information
> >>>  - references
> >>>
> >>> *  Copyright notices and legends
> >>>
> >>>  Please review the copyright notice and legends as defined in  RFC
> >>> 5378 and the Trust Legal Provisions  (TLP – 
> >>> https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info/).
> >>>
> >>> *  Semantic markup
> >>>
> >>>  Please review the markup in the XML file to ensure that elements 
> >>> of content are correctly tagged.  For example, ensure that 
> >>> <sourcecode> and <artwork> are set correctly.  See details at 
> >>> <https://authors.ietf.org/rfcxml-vocabulary>.
> >>>
> >>> *  Formatted output
> >>>
> >>>  Please review the PDF, HTML, and TXT files to ensure that the 
> >>> formatted output, as generated from the markup in the XML file, is 
> >>> reasonable.  Please note that the TXT will have formatting 
> >>> limitations compared to the PDF and HTML.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Submitting changes
> >>> ------------------
> >>>
> >>> To submit changes, please reply to this email using ‘REPLY ALL’ as 
> >>> all the parties CCed on this message need to see your changes. The 
> >>> parties
> >>> include:
> >>>
> >>>  *  your coauthors
> >>>
> >>>  *  [e-mail] (the RPC team)
> >>>
> >>>  *  other document participants, depending on the stream (e.g.,
> >>>     IETF Stream participants are your working group chairs, the
> >>>     responsible ADs, and the document shepherd).
> >>>
> >>>  *  [e-mail], which is a new archival mailing list
> >>>     to preserve AUTH48 conversations; it is not an active discussion
> >>>     list:
> >>>
> >>>    *  More info:
> >>>
> >>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/yb6lpIGh-4Q9l2
> >>> US
> >>> xIAe6P8O4Zc
> >>>
> >>>    *  The archive itself:
> >>>       https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/auth48archive/
> >>>
> >>>    *  Note: If only absolutely necessary, you may temporarily opt out
> >>>       of the archiving of messages (e.g., to discuss a sensitive matter).
> >>>       If needed, please add a note at the top of the message that you
> >>>       have dropped the address. When the discussion is concluded,
> >>>       [e-mail] will be re-added to the CC list and
> >>>       its addition will be noted at the top of the message.
> >>>
> >>> You may submit your changes in one of two ways:
> >>>
> >>> An update to the provided XML file — OR — An explicit list of 
> >>> changes in this format
> >>>
> >>> Section # (or indicate Global)
> >>>
> >>> OLD:
> >>> old text
> >>>
> >>> NEW:
> >>> new text
> >>>
> >>> You do not need to reply with both an updated XML file and an 
> >>> explicit list of changes, as either form is sufficient.
> >>>
> >>> We will ask a stream manager to review and approve any changes 
> >>> that seem beyond editorial in nature, e.g., addition of new text, 
> >>> deletion of text, and technical changes.  Information about stream 
> >>> managers can be found in the FAQ.  Editorial changes do not 
> >>> require
> approval from a stream manager.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Approving for publication
> >>> --------------------------
> >>>
> >>> To approve your RFC for publication, please reply to this email 
> >>> stating that you approve this RFC for publication.  Please use 
> >>> ‘REPLY ALL’, as all the parties CCed on this message need to see 
> >>> your
> approval.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Files
> >>> -----
> >>>
> >>> The files are available here:
> >>>  https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9322.xml
> >>>  https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9322.html
> >>>  https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9322.pdf
> >>>  https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9322.txt
> >>>
> >>> Diff file of the text:
> >>>  https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9322-diff.html
> >>>  https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9322-rfcdiff.html (side by
> >>> side)
> >>>
> >>> Diff of the XML:
> >>>  https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9322-xmldiff1.html
> >>>
> >>> The following files are provided to facilitate creation of your 
> >>> own diff files of the XML.
> >>>
> >>> Initial XMLv3 created using XMLv2 as input:
> >>>  https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9322.original.v2v3.xml
> >>>
> >>> XMLv3 file that is a best effort to capture v3-related format 
> >>> updates
> >>> only:
> >>>  https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9322.form.xml
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Tracking progress
> >>> -----------------
> >>>
> >>> The details of the AUTH48 status of your document are here:
> >>>  https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9322
> >>>
> >>> Please let us know if you have any questions.
> >>>
> >>> Thank you for your cooperation,
> >>>
> >>> RFC Editor
> >>>
> >>> --------------------------------------
> >>> RFC9322 (draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-flags-10)
> >>>
> >>> Title            : In-situ OAM Loopback and Active Flags
> >>> Author(s)        : T. Mizrahi, F. Brockners, S. Bhandari, B. Gafni, M. Spiegel
> >>> WG Chair(s)      : Marcus Ihlar, Tommy Pauly
> >>> Area Director(s) : Martin Duke, Zaheduzzaman Sarker
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >