Re: [Cats] CATS WG Adoption poll for draft-ldbc-cats-framework

All,

As a contributor to initial versions of this document and its iterations later on, I support WG adoption of this draft. 

Building on previously made comments (specifically by Joel and Hang), I would like to also turn the attention to the objective function (or specific algorithm for processing). While the definition of specific algorithms is deemed out of scope for this document (and as Joel points out, for current solution proposals overall), I still wonder how the sentence "However, it is expected that a service request or local policy may feed the C-PS computation logic with Objective Functions that provide some information about the path characteristics" may look in real life? Is this an out-of-scope config issue (it 'somehow' makes it into the C-PS?)? Or could we see the definition of the objective function part of the metric distribution itself (if I distribute metrics, wouldn't I want to somehow link those to the usage within an objective function?). Given that this is a framework document, some words on this may be useful to add - note here that allowing to explicitly link metrics to objective functions (as part of the framework) is somehow the opposite of mandating specific algorithms being used (which I would not support, either, to avoid narrowing the solution space to a small set of such functions). 

Anyhow, beyond this comment, I see this document capturing the evolving discussion and consensus in the wider WG quite well and would like it to progress more!

Best,

Dirk 

-----Original Message-----
From: Cats <cats-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Adrian Farrel
Sent: 23 February 2024 17:44
To: 'cats' <cats@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ldbc-cats-framework@ietf.org; cats-chairs@ietf.org
Subject: [Cats] CATS WG Adoption poll for draft-ldbc-cats-framework

Hi CATS,

We have had IPR disclosure responses from all authors and contributors.
All but one have indicated "no IPR", with the remaining one stating that there is IPR, but the company is doing a detailed analysis before filing a disclosure.

The working group has a milestone for "Adopt the CATS Framework and Architecture document"

So, we are going to start a two week adoption poll for the draft. This will end on 9th March at 9am GMT.

Please state your opinions on whether or not this document should be adopted. Authors and Contributors are also welcome to state their opinions.
Recall that the document does not have to be perfect at this point: we are looking for a starting point that can be taken up by the WG and edited until it is complete and ready.

A simple yes or no is helpful, but doesn't carry much weight.

So, if "yes":
- have you reviewed the document?
- do you have any comments or editorial suggestions?
- do you think this is the right document to meet the milestone?
- why do you think this is a good document?

And, if "no":
- what are your concerns?
- what is your proposal to meet the milestone?

If the current IPR situation is a significant concern to you, you are welcome to state that.

Thanks,
Adrian (for the chairs)

--
Cats mailing list
Cats@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cats