[Detnet] Re: Gorry Fairhurst's No Objection on draft-ietf-raw-technologies-15: (with COMMENT)

[Pascal Thubert <[e-mail]>]

Hello Gorry

I'm concerned that a global summary that places the technologies in the
same section/table with some information that would look like a
comparison would be opening a Pandora's box, attracting the fire from the
vendor layer.

We took great care to provide similar sections for similar information for
all technologies, but at the same time *not* to make it look like we would
compare them or would provide any recommendation on which to use. I'd
rather we keep it that way.

All the best

Pascal

Le mar. 25 mars 2025 à 17:54, Gorry Fairhurst via Datatracker <
[e-mail]> a écrit :

> Gorry Fairhurst has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-raw-technologies-15: No Objection
>
> 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-raw-technologies/
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> This document contains a detailed summary of various lower layer
> technologies.
> It would have been nice for completeness to have had a final section with a
> comparison table showing the various technologies, but I anyway did enjoy
> the
> breadth of this survey. Thanks.
>
>
>
>

-- 
Pascal