[Detnet] John Scudder's Yes on draft-ietf-detnet-mpls-over-ip-preof-10: (with COMMENT)

[John Scudder via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

John Scudder has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-detnet-mpls-over-ip-preof-10: Yes

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-detnet-mpls-over-ip-preof/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for this well-written document. Thanks also to Roman for serving a
special guest AD.

I have one question. In section 4.3, you have "Service-ID values are
provisioned per DetNet service via configuration, i.e., via the Controller
Plane". Later, in section 5, you have "This information is provisioned per
DetNet flow via configuration, e.g., via the controller plane."

Are the respective usages of "i.e." and "e.g." deliberate? That is, is your
intent that in section 4.3, service-ID values should be provided provision only
via the controller plane, but in section 5 you intend that Control and
Management Plane Parameters can be configured any way, and the controller plane
is merely an example?

(My rule of thumb is that i.e. should be read as "in other words", and e.g.
should be read as "for example".)