[OPSAWG] Alvaro Retana's Abstain on draft-ietf-opsawg-l3sm-l3nm-11: (with COMMENT)

Alvaro Retana via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Wed, 22 September 2021 15:54 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: opsawg@ietf.org
Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48A9F3A275F; Wed, 22 Sep 2021 08:54:06 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Alvaro Retana via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-opsawg-l3sm-l3nm@ietf.org, opsawg-chairs@ietf.org, opsawg@ietf.org, adrian@olddog.co.uk
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 7.38.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <163232604558.16460.6761950070242294612@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2021 08:54:06 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/opsawg/03y5enDFitIme4EXmkbdk-Id260>
Subject: [OPSAWG] Alvaro Retana's Abstain on draft-ietf-opsawg-l3sm-l3nm-11: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List <opsawg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/opsawg/>
List-Post: <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2021 15:54:07 -0000

Alvaro Retana has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-opsawg-l3sm-l3nm-11: Abstain

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/blog/handling-iesg-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-opsawg-l3sm-l3nm/



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

I understand that L3NM is not a device model and that, as such, it is not
intended to include every possible parameter.

However, not leveraging existing work has resulted in inconsistencies: from
using different names to changing implementation expectations.  I believe that
this result impacts the implementation-specific work needed to derive
device-specific actions (using existing models) and potentially reduces the
value of using this network model.

Many WGs in the routing area work on related technology, including bess, idr,
lsr, pim, bfd, rtgwg, and teas. However, I found no evidence in the archives
that any of these WGs were consulted or asked to review this work.

Both points (lack of reuse and lack of review) have been mentioned in the
mailing list, so I assume they have been considered.  This fact and the
existence of multiple implementations lead me to ABSTAIN.