[Detnet] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-detnet-architecture-12: (with COMMENT)

Mirja Kühlewind via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Mon, 15 April 2019 11:56 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: detnet@ietf.org
Delivered-To: detnet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAE7C120096; Mon, 15 Apr 2019 04:56:00 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Mirja Kühlewind via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-detnet-architecture@ietf.org, Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>, detnet-chairs@ietf.org, lberger@labn.net, detnet@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.95.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Mirja Kühlewind <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
Message-ID: <155532936068.10827.6039363810956335567.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 04:56:00 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/detnet/zxo7iRYbjlj5_baFYz_rs44fHkE>
Subject: [Detnet] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-detnet-architecture-12: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: detnet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Discussions on Deterministic Networking BoF and Proposed WG <detnet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/detnet>, <mailto:detnet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/detnet/>
List-Post: <mailto:detnet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:detnet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet>, <mailto:detnet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 11:56:01 -0000

Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-detnet-architecture-12: 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/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-detnet-architecture/



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

Thanks for addressing my discuss. One more minor comment: I see the reference
to bufferbloat in section 3.2.1.1, however, I guess the reference would
actually be even more need in section 3.3.2.

I agree with Alexey and Benjamin that this document should be informational.
Informational documents can also have IETF consensus, so that cannot be the
reason to go for PS. However, this document does not specify a protocol or any
requirements that are mandatory to implement for interoperability and therefore
should not be PS.