[mpls] Re: Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-mna-usecases-13: (with COMMENT)

[Greg Mirsky <[e-mail]>]

Hi Eric,
thank you. I've posted the updated version.

Regards,
Greg

On Wed, Sep 18, 2024 at 10:17 PM Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Thank you, Greg, for such a prompt reply.
>
>
>
> I like your final “I hope so too” ;-)
>
>
>
> Still not convinced about the appendix but with the new leading text, it
> is better.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
> -éric
>
>
>
> *From: *Greg Mirsky <[e-mail]>
> *Date: *Wednesday, 18 September 2024 at 23:16
> *To: *Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <[e-mail]>
> *Cc: *The IESG <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] <
> [e-mail]>, [e-mail] <
> [e-mail]>, [e-mail] <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] <[e-mail]>,
> [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
> *Subject: *Re: Éric Vyncke's No Objection on
> draft-ietf-mpls-mna-usecases-13: (with COMMENT)
>
> Hi Éric,
>
> thak you for your review and thoughtful comments. Please find my notes
> below tagged GIM>>. Attached is the diff highlighting the updates.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Greg
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2024 at 12:25 AM Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <
> [e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-mpls-mna-usecases-13: 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-mpls-mna-usecases/
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Thanks for the work done in this document, it is clear and easy to read
> (thanks
> also to Tony Li for the detailed shepherd's write-up).
>
> GIM>> Thank you for your kind words; much appreciated.
>
>
> Two comments though:
>
> # Abstract
>
> Should a date be added to the sentence `the ones that are actively
> discussed by
> members of the IETF MPLS, PALS, and DetNet working groups` ?
>
> GIM>> Would adding time boundary as below would be useful to a reader:
>
> NEW TEXT:
>
>    The use cases described in this document are not an exhaustive set,
>
>    but rather the ones that are actively discussed by members of the
>
>    IETF MPLS, PALS, and DetNet working groups from the beginning of work
>
>    on the MPLS Network Action until the publication of this document.
>
>
> # Appendix A
>
> `The discussion of these aspirational cases is ongoing.` should the WG have
> delayed the request for publication until these use cases are refined ?
> Else,
> suggest removing the appendix.
>
> GIM>> We brought up these questions to the discussion. As I understand it,
> the group agreedx to move forward with the publication of the document in
> its current form. Thinking of your comment above, perhaps the follwoing
> update of the paragraph in Appendix A will be useful:
>
> NEW TEXT:
>
>    Several use cases for which MNA can provide a viable solution have
>
>    been discussed.  The discussion of these aspirational cases is
>
>    ongoing at the time of publication of the document.
>
>
>
>
> # References
>
> As a side note, there are many drafts in the references, let's hope that
> this
> I-D is not too much delayed by draft-ietf-mpls-mna-fwk and that the
> informal
> references will still be useful when published.
>
> GIM>> I hope so too.
>